Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Personal File- Paper Hearts and Assorted Chocolates

Warning: Potential but Tasteful T.M.I

What is romance?
Is it a gesture of admiration communicated through the passing of flowers from the suitor to the object of affection, or is it the lover that has the houseband at a favorite restaurant play the favorite song of the women he's extended his heart to, for no special occasion but just because?

For me, romance is not a hollow, traditional-cookie-cutter-symbol-ridden series of actions that guarantees the woo factor is set in place. It's sweet to have someone bring you flowers, but I guess I've never really been the traditional kind of chic.
I'd be more impressed if the romance was a heartfelt gesture from within the framework of a relationship that is already established, rather than coming from someone who is looking to get 'in' or establish a connection.

I suppose I have these questions in mind because I've been decidely abstinent for what will be 3 years next month, and while I think I am ready to step back into the world (the questions I was hoping to illumine weren't answered through abstinence necessarily...), and connect with someone, I am admittedly unusual in what I find attractive, and very liberated in my ability to be honest with myself about my own physical/spiritual needs. This is not always embraced by the man with the patriarchal mindset (many aren't aware that they have bought into that unequal system between genders hook,line, and sinker but so many have...).

So what to do when I have an Aquarian mindset for the most part and seek the truth in things, not the comfort? I'd rather have a connection to someone who can wake up and say...

"Hey, are you still feeling the same because things have been off for me"

than the person who would bottle it up, act passive-agressively or act as if I am a monster for making the above statement and seeking real communication.

I'm not of the school that believes relationships should be merely tolerated or endured. I believe relationships should fly on the wings of their own passion equivalent with two partners who have the ability to communicate with one another. If someone can't be straight up with you, they're angling you in my book... and angling is nothing more than the softer side of manipulation. In the end it causes the same pain, when preferably, a quick cut heals the fastest.

Communication is good, but how many people are individual enough to embrace it? How many have the courage to be themselves despite the possibility that they won't be well-received?

Saul Williams talks on the necessity of accepting our vulnerability. In a society that went out of its way to take away the glory of the purer more innocent and ephemeral truths at the exquisite heart of our vulnerability, by attacking the image of femininity on down to nature itself, many are hardpressed to reach for the truth of the now, over the ego-gratification of wearing a shield and having weaponry prepared early on. This causes an unfortunate rift, and unnecessary burden on those who do strive to walk purely and without the false gratification of war mentality that seems to provide a sense of security to a large percentage of the population.

I don't want to be a part of the population that walks around with a shield erected on a regular basis.

How can we ever get to know anyone if we are constantly waiting for them to strike unfairly or in some way disappoint us?

I am probably way too picky in some areas, but I am sure it is not something that will ever change. Without overanalyzing the life out of something, it is important to me that I be able to define whatever I'm faced with.

I suppose it's because I don't think men are imbeciles by nature as some seem to believe they wholeheartedly are. I think men are vulnerable and at their root, honorable creatures who in large part are disconnected from their fathers and a healthy archetype of what manhood is. They too have been scapegoated into conforming to an image. It's an image that deprives them (if they adhere to the mold) of an emotional experience that is vital to maintaining sanity.

At the same time, a Valentines card and some cookies will never top a real conversation in my book, nor will they top a passionate connection that is honest for its duration (however long that may be). It's cute but it's not real. It's a gesture. Beyond the gesture where is the real intention? It's not to say gestures are useless, but unimaginative gestures are too easy to fabricate and pass off as an effort at connecting when they are not.

I think I've been irritated by the shallow experience society seems to favor for as long as I've been in touch with my identity. This applies to relationships of all kinds, and rather than feel I may be an oddball as I undoubtedly on an intangible and emotional level, I am thinking rather that it is odd for anyone not to be uncomfortable with the lack of reality in what people call reality.

I think I've been outspoken in many ways but have hidden for years on some level as well and I don't want to do that anymore. I like who I am, and I think we all have the potential to. I would just like to run into someone who likes who they are enough to hold onto who they are and who is willing to let loose the crutch of convention handed down to them long enough to be intimate in a connection sans unintentional manipulation or posturing.
If we don't challenge the prevailing and publicly ineffective philosophies society airs for us (which these days is primarily a sex/lust campaign to a brazen and tasteless degree that amazes me...) these boxes will kill us or drive us insane to the point of near complete identity loss when we are obviously created to be individuals with painstaking precision.

I think this may conclude my ramblings for the moment.
This Personal File is becoming an unintended and surprising catharsis, and while I don't think the entries will be frequent regarding personal subject matter, they may continue to happen every now and again.

Enjoy your week and be your beautiful shining self throughout it.

No comments: