This article is simply perfect. Sparky's next step can be painful, and it's a step I've been caught in, stuck like a plastic bag snagged on barbed wire, for over ten years now: evolution - evolution of the spirit/soul/whichever term you like - is usually a very lonely affair. The pack is slow to grow (as much as I am a socialist, I am also an anarchist, for the sake of the individual); when you convoy, you feel safe. When you go it alone, you don't have the companionship, but you also don't have anyone telling you to pull over at every McDonald's. I take Sparky's column as a wake-up call. For me, it's a re-awakening, because this is a lesson I've been taught many times, and I can even teach it to the best of my ability, but I really haven't mastered it. Barely begun the process really.
"There Shouldn't be Rules to Being GLBT" by Sparky
http://www.womanist-musings.com/2012/01/there-shouldnt-be-rules-to-being-glbt.html
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Something's missing
I'm having trouble letting go.
2012 is my year for letting go. 2011 was me, shellshocked from an accumulation of years of dreams gone sour, efforts achieving naught, and I was set to simply make my life about finding a job I could retire from, build a life with my boyfriend, retire, and eventually die.
I've always believed in some hidden purpose behind my life. I believed I would achieve something great, something lasting.
But I've achieved the stature of Ozymandias, only the monuments I've built were never built. They fell apart before they could be finished.
And I realize this sounds self-pitying. Overly Western maybe. People all over the world are lucky to have drinkable water, and here I am bemoaning the fact that I'm not successfully providing concrete evidence - exhibitions - of my supposed genius.
It may be pathetic that I'm even writing this, but it's true. It's how I feel. And I'm angry and sad because I don't feel the power inside me to let go of it. I've heard it a million times: 99% is a bitch, 100% is a breeze. Just let go and float into the unknown.
I do try to do that, but it seems more of an escape. I visualize myself floating in space, past the giant spheres of the universe, or exploring the wonders of the ocean. A being forgotten, unneeded, totally free, just being, just experiencing.
Unfortunately, translating that meditative bliss to some kind of belief system hasn't worked out.
Two ways of looking at it are clear. I could look at this as simply part of the path towards freedom, disengaging from my self-expectations. The other possibility is that by giving up my dreams, I have denied a major, important part of my soul.
2012 is my year for letting go. 2011 was me, shellshocked from an accumulation of years of dreams gone sour, efforts achieving naught, and I was set to simply make my life about finding a job I could retire from, build a life with my boyfriend, retire, and eventually die.
I've always believed in some hidden purpose behind my life. I believed I would achieve something great, something lasting.
But I've achieved the stature of Ozymandias, only the monuments I've built were never built. They fell apart before they could be finished.
And I realize this sounds self-pitying. Overly Western maybe. People all over the world are lucky to have drinkable water, and here I am bemoaning the fact that I'm not successfully providing concrete evidence - exhibitions - of my supposed genius.
It may be pathetic that I'm even writing this, but it's true. It's how I feel. And I'm angry and sad because I don't feel the power inside me to let go of it. I've heard it a million times: 99% is a bitch, 100% is a breeze. Just let go and float into the unknown.
I do try to do that, but it seems more of an escape. I visualize myself floating in space, past the giant spheres of the universe, or exploring the wonders of the ocean. A being forgotten, unneeded, totally free, just being, just experiencing.
Unfortunately, translating that meditative bliss to some kind of belief system hasn't worked out.
Two ways of looking at it are clear. I could look at this as simply part of the path towards freedom, disengaging from my self-expectations. The other possibility is that by giving up my dreams, I have denied a major, important part of my soul.
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Little personal facts
1. Certain sounds repulse me. The pouring of liquid. Eating and drinking sounds. Clinking silverware on plates. Sandpaper/wiping dirt off of rocks/that sort of thing, especially if I imagine what that feels like.
2. The moon is possibly my most important spiritual symbol.
3. I love mosque (masjid) photos, even though I’m not a practicing Muslim and I’ve never been to one.
4. 2011 sucked bigtime for me, but ended very nicely. I landed a part-time dishwasher job and an interview for a full-time better-paying office job. I could go from basically unemployed to working 60-hour weeks very soon.
5. I’m still grieving my choice to leave behind my academic dreams after more than 20 years of holding onto those dreams. At 41, I’m ready to just take a job and retire from it someday. Letting go of ambition has been a crushing experience. I’m hoping to go through the grief and come out at the other end in a sort of personal resurrection.
6. My boyfriend is 20 years younger than me. We have been officially together for over a year, we have very little in common, but we are making it work.
7. I will probably always love “boy bands.” I think it’s because they bring back childhood/teen closet memories. They touch something of my past that still hurts a bit in my heart. And their music, however corny, brings me healing.
8. The only kind of spiritual process that brings me faith is in-the-moment experiential spiritual activity, like meditation, ritual, music, dancing, being surrounded by religious art, etc. I have (as of yet) failed to maintain faith just by thinking about it, reasoning things out, or any other strictly mental exercise. If I relied purely on intellect, I would be a strict agnostic. But I’m not. I feel strongly there is something beyond this life, an afterlife, other beings, maybe even a singular God, and my spiritual quest is to experience more about that, not necessarily to declare faith or argue about it. No human’s declarations are convincing to me, and certainly no religion’s moralism or dictates. As a postcard I have says, “Faith is a journey, not a guilt trip.”
9. If you have read this far, I think you’re one of the coolest people ever. Thank you.
2. The moon is possibly my most important spiritual symbol.
3. I love mosque (masjid) photos, even though I’m not a practicing Muslim and I’ve never been to one.
4. 2011 sucked bigtime for me, but ended very nicely. I landed a part-time dishwasher job and an interview for a full-time better-paying office job. I could go from basically unemployed to working 60-hour weeks very soon.
5. I’m still grieving my choice to leave behind my academic dreams after more than 20 years of holding onto those dreams. At 41, I’m ready to just take a job and retire from it someday. Letting go of ambition has been a crushing experience. I’m hoping to go through the grief and come out at the other end in a sort of personal resurrection.
6. My boyfriend is 20 years younger than me. We have been officially together for over a year, we have very little in common, but we are making it work.
7. I will probably always love “boy bands.” I think it’s because they bring back childhood/teen closet memories. They touch something of my past that still hurts a bit in my heart. And their music, however corny, brings me healing.
8. The only kind of spiritual process that brings me faith is in-the-moment experiential spiritual activity, like meditation, ritual, music, dancing, being surrounded by religious art, etc. I have (as of yet) failed to maintain faith just by thinking about it, reasoning things out, or any other strictly mental exercise. If I relied purely on intellect, I would be a strict agnostic. But I’m not. I feel strongly there is something beyond this life, an afterlife, other beings, maybe even a singular God, and my spiritual quest is to experience more about that, not necessarily to declare faith or argue about it. No human’s declarations are convincing to me, and certainly no religion’s moralism or dictates. As a postcard I have says, “Faith is a journey, not a guilt trip.”
9. If you have read this far, I think you’re one of the coolest people ever. Thank you.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
A note I wrote to a soldier who said Bradley Manning is a traitor for putting soldiers in "harm's way"
If Manning did a noble thing, he did it from a position that very few people have access to. Kicking him out is keeping vital information from the public. The military was committing crimes of a very grievous nature, a military funded from the taxes all of us pay. Going to war puts soldiers in danger already. I don’t see that your point is greater than getting the truth about actual war crimes and atrocities out into the public eye.
In other words, you asked to be in battle. Civilians did not.
Sorry if I sound blunt, but I’m not sure why we should be concerned about putting soldiers in harm’s way in a war. That’s what you’re there for. Personally, I think all the wars should be cancelled and you all should come home. It’s time for humanity to assume its natural evolution into a nonviolent species. ”Traitor” is an outdated term, just like “patriotism” and “country.”
Finally, the actions of those who committed the atrocities are the ones who made life more dangerous for soldiers, not those who blew the whistle. This is, in very literal terms, punishing the messenger. The traitors are the ones who ordered AND carried out such acts, not the one who revealed them.
In other words, you asked to be in battle. Civilians did not.
Sorry if I sound blunt, but I’m not sure why we should be concerned about putting soldiers in harm’s way in a war. That’s what you’re there for. Personally, I think all the wars should be cancelled and you all should come home. It’s time for humanity to assume its natural evolution into a nonviolent species. ”Traitor” is an outdated term, just like “patriotism” and “country.”
Finally, the actions of those who committed the atrocities are the ones who made life more dangerous for soldiers, not those who blew the whistle. This is, in very literal terms, punishing the messenger. The traitors are the ones who ordered AND carried out such acts, not the one who revealed them.
Monday, December 20, 2010
My top 14 albums for 2010 featuring women singers!
1. Janelle Monáe - The ArchAndroid
2. Carolina Chocolate Drops - Genuine Negro Jig
3. Robyn - Body Talk
4. Sade - Soldier of Love
5. Best Coast - Crazy for You
6. St. Lola in the Fields - High Atop the Houses and the Towns
7. Angus & Julia Stone - Down the Way
8. Shakira - Sale El Sol
9. KT Tungstall - Tiger Suit
10. Lady Gaga - The Fame Monster (An EP but still cool)
11. Kylie Minogue - Aphrodite
12. Azure Ray - Drawing Down the Moon
13. Sharon Jones and the Dap Kings - I Learned the Hard Way
14. Ke$ha - Cannibal
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Incredible Hulk, Biology, Intelligent Design, and the Total Lie that is Adaptation Via Natural Selection
This is what I awoke with, cogitating through closed eyes, groggy from some medicine I took last night, a grogginess which will not leave me, and so I share my points as point-by-point. I confess I'm feeling very clever right now, my head-full-of-cotton notwithstanding.
1. Preface: I'm not doing any additional research, so any one of these points could be proven wrong, with a simple reference to the Incredible Hulk's long history, biology, or intelligent design argumentation. I still boldly go, intuitively raining my brilliance upon the Nation of Facebook.
2. Let us proceed, for a bit, to reason from a scientific mindset.
3. When Bruce Banner becomes the Hulk, he gets a lot bigger, stronger, and less intelligent, more simple in choosing the factors upon which he chooses to act. He converts from brilliant scientist to freakish huge green cave-thingie.
4. When this happens, do certain neural pathways gently unplug themselves from each other? As the body grows, do the synapses fail to grow along with the skeleton, the muscles, the skin? I propose something like this must happen. Just as his clothing remains on his body, even though in the comics he sometimes grows ten times his size, this so he doesn't show his big green penis to the millions of ten-year-olds who used to read his comic book, so must his synapses remain undamaged. So it must be a gentle process he undergoes, which allows him to return to the status of Scientific Smart Person at some point with all of his cognitive abilities reinstated as if nothing had happened.
5. Furthermore, "Hulk smash" is not similar to how any two-year-old I've met speaks. Nobody talks like that. So this is not a cognitive reversion to childhood. Maybe it is literary (more on that in a moment) device to show that he is becoming more like a beast than a man, but scientifically speaking, that is not allowed. Hulk's linguistic change is not deterioriation - he loses weird things, like prepositions, and verb tenses, and commas. And when he shrinks back down in size and becomes Banner again, he's able to speak normally again.
6. We should note that, while there appears to be a connection with whatever keeps his close from ripping completely off his body and whatever the heck happens to his neural network, the difference is obvious: he does lose his shirt and the lower-leg portion of his purple pants do end up shredded. The only parallel I can see is that Banner's Hulkifying does damage to his conscience and his social life, so maybe I'm onto something there. That appears, however, to be literary rather than biochemical.
7. (Speaking of literary, and films are considered part of literary study these days, while Banner might feel fortunate that he doesn't always emerge from Hulkdom completely naked, werewolves in movies and TV do not share that luck. Of course, that makes this viewer happy, as there are so many hot actors playing werewolves and it's always nice to see them completely naked. The exception I must note is the second Twilight film - I haven't seen the third, as the second was terrible but I can't help it, I have a Robert Pattinson attraction as big as the Hulk himself - in which the actors are underaged, and the world is paranoid about underaged nudity these days, in spite of the irony of the focus on a gang of muscled teenage boys running around shirtless certainly having some element of sexual intent behind it.)
8. Most of what I've observed, excluding #7, which is True and not False, would certainly not match what scientists have observed thusfar in the natural world. Unless, like with the extra-terrestrial crash-landing at Roswell, they are keeping it a secret from us, scientists have most likely not observed a human turn into a very large creature with strange verbal skills return to his normal state with his former intelligence and verbal acuity regenerated.
9. Either:
10. Bruce Banner has regenerative powers, and the gamma-ray blast gave those to him along with everything else, or
11. God exists as an intelligent designer, and Darwin worshipped Satan.
Note: is the Bruce Banner/Hulk dichotomy the two sides of Jesus, both God and Man? Or something more complicated, like Jesus and Herod?
1. Preface: I'm not doing any additional research, so any one of these points could be proven wrong, with a simple reference to the Incredible Hulk's long history, biology, or intelligent design argumentation. I still boldly go, intuitively raining my brilliance upon the Nation of Facebook.
2. Let us proceed, for a bit, to reason from a scientific mindset.
3. When Bruce Banner becomes the Hulk, he gets a lot bigger, stronger, and less intelligent, more simple in choosing the factors upon which he chooses to act. He converts from brilliant scientist to freakish huge green cave-thingie.
4. When this happens, do certain neural pathways gently unplug themselves from each other? As the body grows, do the synapses fail to grow along with the skeleton, the muscles, the skin? I propose something like this must happen. Just as his clothing remains on his body, even though in the comics he sometimes grows ten times his size, this so he doesn't show his big green penis to the millions of ten-year-olds who used to read his comic book, so must his synapses remain undamaged. So it must be a gentle process he undergoes, which allows him to return to the status of Scientific Smart Person at some point with all of his cognitive abilities reinstated as if nothing had happened.
5. Furthermore, "Hulk smash" is not similar to how any two-year-old I've met speaks. Nobody talks like that. So this is not a cognitive reversion to childhood. Maybe it is literary (more on that in a moment) device to show that he is becoming more like a beast than a man, but scientifically speaking, that is not allowed. Hulk's linguistic change is not deterioriation - he loses weird things, like prepositions, and verb tenses, and commas. And when he shrinks back down in size and becomes Banner again, he's able to speak normally again.
6. We should note that, while there appears to be a connection with whatever keeps his close from ripping completely off his body and whatever the heck happens to his neural network, the difference is obvious: he does lose his shirt and the lower-leg portion of his purple pants do end up shredded. The only parallel I can see is that Banner's Hulkifying does damage to his conscience and his social life, so maybe I'm onto something there. That appears, however, to be literary rather than biochemical.
7. (Speaking of literary, and films are considered part of literary study these days, while Banner might feel fortunate that he doesn't always emerge from Hulkdom completely naked, werewolves in movies and TV do not share that luck. Of course, that makes this viewer happy, as there are so many hot actors playing werewolves and it's always nice to see them completely naked. The exception I must note is the second Twilight film - I haven't seen the third, as the second was terrible but I can't help it, I have a Robert Pattinson attraction as big as the Hulk himself - in which the actors are underaged, and the world is paranoid about underaged nudity these days, in spite of the irony of the focus on a gang of muscled teenage boys running around shirtless certainly having some element of sexual intent behind it.)
8. Most of what I've observed, excluding #7, which is True and not False, would certainly not match what scientists have observed thusfar in the natural world. Unless, like with the extra-terrestrial crash-landing at Roswell, they are keeping it a secret from us, scientists have most likely not observed a human turn into a very large creature with strange verbal skills return to his normal state with his former intelligence and verbal acuity regenerated.
9. Either:
10. Bruce Banner has regenerative powers, and the gamma-ray blast gave those to him along with everything else, or
11. God exists as an intelligent designer, and Darwin worshipped Satan.
Note: is the Bruce Banner/Hulk dichotomy the two sides of Jesus, both God and Man? Or something more complicated, like Jesus and Herod?
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
The smallness of spirituality, sometimes
I share this because in all the debate that continues about God vs science (as if there needs to be any opposition between the two), all the wondering about our individual problems, concerns about gay marriage, concerns about the U.S. becoming a theocracy, and so much else, is the God in question the God of all the earthlings, all the earth-like-planetlings, or is all of this explained in some bigger way? As I make my own way along the path of life, the spiritual life, whatever phase I feel like I'm in, whatever label I slap on myself to tell people what I believe, is insufficient, or too specific, or too small.
When I see stories like this, my spiritual view just seems to small to hold it all.
----
More than 100 'Earth-like' planets discovered in past few weeks
By Niall Firth
Last updated at 11:43 AM on 23rd July 2010
(Excerpt):
The breakthrough raises the tantalising prospect that we may not be alone in the Universe.
Scientists now believe that there are likely to be around 100 million planets in the Milky Way that harbour exactly the right conditions for life.
And they expect to be able to identify around 60 of these habitable Earth-like planets within the next two years.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1296841/More-100-Earth-like-planets-just-past-weeks.html#ixzz0uvYCCHw5
When I see stories like this, my spiritual view just seems to small to hold it all.
----
More than 100 'Earth-like' planets discovered in past few weeks
By Niall Firth
Last updated at 11:43 AM on 23rd July 2010
(Excerpt):
The breakthrough raises the tantalising prospect that we may not be alone in the Universe.
Scientists now believe that there are likely to be around 100 million planets in the Milky Way that harbour exactly the right conditions for life.
And they expect to be able to identify around 60 of these habitable Earth-like planets within the next two years.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1296841/More-100-Earth-like-planets-just-past-weeks.html#ixzz0uvYCCHw5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Share It
Twitter Updates
Posts
