people
people people always ask
me what is wrong when
i am just sitting there
i have this face you see and it is a long face what is with the long face
but
i swear it is only when
i sit quietly
i swear so nothing is wrong hichi hichi
people people tell
me to talk like jabbing
me in the side
i think it is funny how now
people have to tell
me to talk when before
people used to have to tell
me to shut the hell up
and
i know it was a mistake but
i had to pick between the two between
me talking myself into madness and
me shutting up so that
people could stand the company of
me
i think it is ironic because
people still have problems with
me and that which does or does not come out of my mouth
but
i chose to shutup and hopefully that is okay with
you.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Thoughts on Iran, Democracy, and Freedom
I'm no political theorist. In fact, politics piss me off most of the time. But even if I don't understand how the world works, I understand how people work. If I sound defensive, it's because I am. I can see eye-to-eye with a country I do not agree with at all. Yes, the fact that I am the same ethnicity of the people of that country may have been the doorway for me, but it doesn't change the fact that I am a liberal American with nothing in common with the political leaders of that country. Still, it does not stop me from trying to be just and trying to understand.
These are some random, yet defensive, considerations I have had on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran:
#1. What is it with Americans jabbering on and on about implementing democracy in the Middle East? And what's further; why do they keep including Iran in that mix? First of all, there are democratic elections in Iran; people vote for a president. In fact, many government officials are appointed by universal suffrage--there is no dictatorship to speak of. The thing people confuse with a dictatorship is the Supreme Leader of Iran, the only one with more power than the President. Yes, the Supreme Leader gets to decide if and when Iran is at war, which may be odd, but he is mostly responsible for the delineation of the policies of the Islamic Republic. Let's face it, though; Iran is a theocratic government, and last I checked, that is a viable governmental body that does not, by nature, alienate human rights. If people are going to get snippy about a supreme religious leader, let's boot the Pope out of the Vatican--that's a country. Where is the democracy there? Furthermore, someone having more power than Parliament makes people nervous, but what about Monarchy? Monarchy is still okay in the world's book. At least Iran's Supreme Leader is appointed by a group of elected officials (Yes, he is!) The Queen of England? Not so much. I believe she was appointed by "God." And as far as the U.S. goes, try to tell me the electoral college doesn't choose the president and the popular vote does.
Iran IS democratic, and they can have as many elections and violent, bloody revolutions as they want because it is their right as a nation to decide and seal their own fate. If you are not Iranian, you have no right to tell the Iranian government what to do--that is a privilege reserved for Iranian citizens. They can tear down their own cities and persecute their own leaders. They don't need anyone else for that.
#2. What is it with Americans jabbering on about inhumane government in the Middle East? And what's further, why do they keep including Iran in that mix? Iranians have such immutable freedoms as we do (freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, etc). Such freedoms are adopted by their constitution and protected by the government. Sounds good, but there is one little snag: it is still a theocratic country, governed by Islamic religious leaders. This means that all articles of the Constitution as well other laws that are amended are all based on Islamic criteria. That means, if any laws are passed or people are subjected to anything publicly, it must fit within the confines of Islamic belief. What we must understand is this: that is what is PC in that country. Islamic concepts are politically correct in a country that is politically Islamic. Likewise, anti-Islamic concepts are politically INcorrect in a country that is politically Islamic. This is where "inhumanity" comes in. People in Iran are often punished for breaking Islamic rules: It is not because they are practicing another religion or refusing to practice Islam--it is because they are breaking a national law that happens to coincide with Islam. The U.S. has a Constitution based heavily on Christian principles. If the U.S. can uphold a Constitution based on Christian principles, why can't the Islamic Republic of Iran uphold a constitution based on Islamic principles?
#2a. BUT WHAT ABOUT FREEDOM OF RELIGION? One grave misunderstanding that I have encountered is that many people think there is no freedom of religion in Iran. That is not true. Let's get one thing straight: there is religious freedom in Iran. Article 23 of the Iranian Constitution holds that, “the investigation of individuals’ beliefs is forbidden, and no one may be molested or taken to task simply for holding a certain belief.” The difference between their freedom of religion and that of the U.S. is that Iran has a state religion; the U.S. does not (supposedly). In America, if you commit murder, you go to jail or even get executed. One of the ten commandments is "Thou shalt not kill." If someone is executed for murder, it is not because they broke one of the ten commandments, but rather because they broke a law of this country that happens to coincide with one of the ten commandments. Like I said, their Constitution is based on Islamic principles just as ours is based on Christian ones. People of different beliefs are not punished for them.
#2b. BUT WHAT ABOUT CRUEL AND UNUSAL PUNISHMENT? As far as cruel, unusual, or capital punishment goes, I must say that I have a lot of trouble wrapping my head around that one myself. Some of the punishments are pulled straight out of the Torah; most of it is "an eye for an eye." I will never find leaving the world blind and toothless an agreeable act, but like I said, it is not really up to us to stop Iran--with rights come responsibilities. It is the Iranian people who must put such actions of their government to an end, if they so choose. The only comfort I find in all this, is that Iran has a complex judiciary system like we do, and citizens are given fair trials, judged by their peers, and sentenced by judges who have studied and sworn to uphold the law. Adulterers and homosexuals are not snatched out of bed, mid-coitus, and stoned naked in the street (forgive me for being crude). It doesn't work that way. They are tried and sentenced. That is all I have to say about that.
#3. When President Mahmoud Ahamadinejad claimed that "there are no homosexuals in Iran," I'll admit that I even felt embarrassed. Of course there are homosexuals in Iran. He knows it. They know it. Even I, who never stepped foot in that country know it. Why? Because there are homosexuals everywhere! Homosexuality is a large and widely-undeniable part of human nature--or so many of us believe. We all know religion is the biggest foe of openly-accepted homosexuality on the planet. Conservative Christians and Jews all shake a finger at it, based on this book and that book, Old Testament, New Testament, Leviticus, Rabbinic Prohibitons, etc. etc. etc. Islam is the same way. So, when the state is conservatively Islam, you can bet that homosexual acts are prohibited. But back to Ahmadinejad's comment, about there being "no homosexuals in Iran." The ravings of a lunatic, right? Clearly the man is completely disillusioned. Here is the interesting part: he's not. The Iranian Constitution protects the rights of individuals. They would NEVER punish someone for their sexual orientation (Now I sound crazy). Here's the problem: Iran does not, however, recognize homosexuality as a sexual orientation. Therefore, people are not punished for being homosexual, but rather punished for committing homosexual acts, which are against the rules in Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. So when Ahmadinejad says there are "no homosexuals in Iran," he's right. There officially aren't. Of course, if he would take the time to peruse the house parties in Tehran, he would realize he is gravely mistaken.
#3a. FUCK YOU, JIMMY LaSALVIA, director of the gay conservative group GOProud, who recently spoke out against "the threat posed to the civilized world by radical Islam." LaSalvia claimed, "All across the Muslim world, gays and lesbians, along with women and religious minorities, are denied basic civil rights. Indeed, the penalty for simply being gay in Muslim countries like Iran is death.” I'll admit, the Iranian government has found an interesting loop-hole to persecute gays with, but don't walk around making claims that (and I'll quote it again) "women and religious minorities, are denied basic civil rights." That is simply not true! It is such ignorant statements that perpetuate misconceptions like that. Women, minorities, and religious minorities, are given the same rights as anyone else in Iran. Furthermore, homosexuals are technically allowed the same rights, if you think about it. I agree that homosexual acts should not be punishable and I have a dream that this will happen in Iran someday, but I do not agree with perpetuating the stereotype that people are denied basic rights and freedoms in Iran. That is ignorant and it is what makes ignorant people think Iran is barbaric. And furthermore, who's to say America recognizes homosexuality if gays can't get married here? We need to fix our own fucking country's bigotry before we can tackle that of anyone else's.
#4. Along with stating that there are "no homosexuals in Iran," I think one of the most George W. Bush moments President Ahmadinejad ever had was officially denying the Holocaust. When I heard that, I slapped my forehead in astonishment and disbelief. Only idiocy can fuel such errant behavior. Still, another misconception I have encountered is that Persians hate Jews and Iran officially stands against Judaism. If that were the case, then how would one explain the fact that, according to the Iranian census, the second-largest religion practiced in the country is Judaism? If Persians are against Judaism, then why are there so many Persian Jews? If Iran is persecuting Judaism, then why are there so many synogogues, and why are they packed all the time? Why aren't Persians afraid to go to temple? The reason is simple: Iran is anti-Israel, not anti-Judaism. The same goes for most of the world: Just because one does not agree with Israel, it does not mean that one is against Judaism. In fact, it does not even mean that one is anti-Semitic. There are so many reasons, beyond religion, that one would politically be against the State of Israel. I will not go into it, now, but I think a lot is to be said about a country that is so anti-Israeli (anti-ISRAELI--not anti-JEWISH; I can't stress that enough) yet houses more Jews than any other Muslim country in the world.
#5. Short and sweet. If the Islamic Republic of Iran is so horrible, then why is it one of the largest refugee states in the world? Why do people flock there from dozens of other countries, including Iraq and Afghanistan, seeking a land of equal rights and better economic opportunity?
Reflection:
a) If the U.N. came knocking on the U.S.' door, saying we aren't allowed to have nukes, we'd laugh in their face and give them the finger, like the Patriots we are.
b) If England came back (again) and said that a democracy is not a viable form of government and that we must implement a monarchy, we'd kick their ass (for the third time).
c) We rally on an on about equal rights, but Prop 8 passed and the Equal Rights Amendment failed. Whose to say women and homosexuals have equal rights in this country?
These are some random, yet defensive, considerations I have had on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran:
#1. What is it with Americans jabbering on and on about implementing democracy in the Middle East? And what's further; why do they keep including Iran in that mix? First of all, there are democratic elections in Iran; people vote for a president. In fact, many government officials are appointed by universal suffrage--there is no dictatorship to speak of. The thing people confuse with a dictatorship is the Supreme Leader of Iran, the only one with more power than the President. Yes, the Supreme Leader gets to decide if and when Iran is at war, which may be odd, but he is mostly responsible for the delineation of the policies of the Islamic Republic. Let's face it, though; Iran is a theocratic government, and last I checked, that is a viable governmental body that does not, by nature, alienate human rights. If people are going to get snippy about a supreme religious leader, let's boot the Pope out of the Vatican--that's a country. Where is the democracy there? Furthermore, someone having more power than Parliament makes people nervous, but what about Monarchy? Monarchy is still okay in the world's book. At least Iran's Supreme Leader is appointed by a group of elected officials (Yes, he is!) The Queen of England? Not so much. I believe she was appointed by "God." And as far as the U.S. goes, try to tell me the electoral college doesn't choose the president and the popular vote does.
Iran IS democratic, and they can have as many elections and violent, bloody revolutions as they want because it is their right as a nation to decide and seal their own fate. If you are not Iranian, you have no right to tell the Iranian government what to do--that is a privilege reserved for Iranian citizens. They can tear down their own cities and persecute their own leaders. They don't need anyone else for that.
#2. What is it with Americans jabbering on about inhumane government in the Middle East? And what's further, why do they keep including Iran in that mix? Iranians have such immutable freedoms as we do (freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, etc). Such freedoms are adopted by their constitution and protected by the government. Sounds good, but there is one little snag: it is still a theocratic country, governed by Islamic religious leaders. This means that all articles of the Constitution as well other laws that are amended are all based on Islamic criteria. That means, if any laws are passed or people are subjected to anything publicly, it must fit within the confines of Islamic belief. What we must understand is this: that is what is PC in that country. Islamic concepts are politically correct in a country that is politically Islamic. Likewise, anti-Islamic concepts are politically INcorrect in a country that is politically Islamic. This is where "inhumanity" comes in. People in Iran are often punished for breaking Islamic rules: It is not because they are practicing another religion or refusing to practice Islam--it is because they are breaking a national law that happens to coincide with Islam. The U.S. has a Constitution based heavily on Christian principles. If the U.S. can uphold a Constitution based on Christian principles, why can't the Islamic Republic of Iran uphold a constitution based on Islamic principles?
#2a. BUT WHAT ABOUT FREEDOM OF RELIGION? One grave misunderstanding that I have encountered is that many people think there is no freedom of religion in Iran. That is not true. Let's get one thing straight: there is religious freedom in Iran. Article 23 of the Iranian Constitution holds that, “the investigation of individuals’ beliefs is forbidden, and no one may be molested or taken to task simply for holding a certain belief.” The difference between their freedom of religion and that of the U.S. is that Iran has a state religion; the U.S. does not (supposedly). In America, if you commit murder, you go to jail or even get executed. One of the ten commandments is "Thou shalt not kill." If someone is executed for murder, it is not because they broke one of the ten commandments, but rather because they broke a law of this country that happens to coincide with one of the ten commandments. Like I said, their Constitution is based on Islamic principles just as ours is based on Christian ones. People of different beliefs are not punished for them.
#2b. BUT WHAT ABOUT CRUEL AND UNUSAL PUNISHMENT? As far as cruel, unusual, or capital punishment goes, I must say that I have a lot of trouble wrapping my head around that one myself. Some of the punishments are pulled straight out of the Torah; most of it is "an eye for an eye." I will never find leaving the world blind and toothless an agreeable act, but like I said, it is not really up to us to stop Iran--with rights come responsibilities. It is the Iranian people who must put such actions of their government to an end, if they so choose. The only comfort I find in all this, is that Iran has a complex judiciary system like we do, and citizens are given fair trials, judged by their peers, and sentenced by judges who have studied and sworn to uphold the law. Adulterers and homosexuals are not snatched out of bed, mid-coitus, and stoned naked in the street (forgive me for being crude). It doesn't work that way. They are tried and sentenced. That is all I have to say about that.
#3. When President Mahmoud Ahamadinejad claimed that "there are no homosexuals in Iran," I'll admit that I even felt embarrassed. Of course there are homosexuals in Iran. He knows it. They know it. Even I, who never stepped foot in that country know it. Why? Because there are homosexuals everywhere! Homosexuality is a large and widely-undeniable part of human nature--or so many of us believe. We all know religion is the biggest foe of openly-accepted homosexuality on the planet. Conservative Christians and Jews all shake a finger at it, based on this book and that book, Old Testament, New Testament, Leviticus, Rabbinic Prohibitons, etc. etc. etc. Islam is the same way. So, when the state is conservatively Islam, you can bet that homosexual acts are prohibited. But back to Ahmadinejad's comment, about there being "no homosexuals in Iran." The ravings of a lunatic, right? Clearly the man is completely disillusioned. Here is the interesting part: he's not. The Iranian Constitution protects the rights of individuals. They would NEVER punish someone for their sexual orientation (Now I sound crazy). Here's the problem: Iran does not, however, recognize homosexuality as a sexual orientation. Therefore, people are not punished for being homosexual, but rather punished for committing homosexual acts, which are against the rules in Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. So when Ahmadinejad says there are "no homosexuals in Iran," he's right. There officially aren't. Of course, if he would take the time to peruse the house parties in Tehran, he would realize he is gravely mistaken.
#3a. FUCK YOU, JIMMY LaSALVIA, director of the gay conservative group GOProud, who recently spoke out against "the threat posed to the civilized world by radical Islam." LaSalvia claimed, "All across the Muslim world, gays and lesbians, along with women and religious minorities, are denied basic civil rights. Indeed, the penalty for simply being gay in Muslim countries like Iran is death.” I'll admit, the Iranian government has found an interesting loop-hole to persecute gays with, but don't walk around making claims that (and I'll quote it again) "women and religious minorities, are denied basic civil rights." That is simply not true! It is such ignorant statements that perpetuate misconceptions like that. Women, minorities, and religious minorities, are given the same rights as anyone else in Iran. Furthermore, homosexuals are technically allowed the same rights, if you think about it. I agree that homosexual acts should not be punishable and I have a dream that this will happen in Iran someday, but I do not agree with perpetuating the stereotype that people are denied basic rights and freedoms in Iran. That is ignorant and it is what makes ignorant people think Iran is barbaric. And furthermore, who's to say America recognizes homosexuality if gays can't get married here? We need to fix our own fucking country's bigotry before we can tackle that of anyone else's.
#4. Along with stating that there are "no homosexuals in Iran," I think one of the most George W. Bush moments President Ahmadinejad ever had was officially denying the Holocaust. When I heard that, I slapped my forehead in astonishment and disbelief. Only idiocy can fuel such errant behavior. Still, another misconception I have encountered is that Persians hate Jews and Iran officially stands against Judaism. If that were the case, then how would one explain the fact that, according to the Iranian census, the second-largest religion practiced in the country is Judaism? If Persians are against Judaism, then why are there so many Persian Jews? If Iran is persecuting Judaism, then why are there so many synogogues, and why are they packed all the time? Why aren't Persians afraid to go to temple? The reason is simple: Iran is anti-Israel, not anti-Judaism. The same goes for most of the world: Just because one does not agree with Israel, it does not mean that one is against Judaism. In fact, it does not even mean that one is anti-Semitic. There are so many reasons, beyond religion, that one would politically be against the State of Israel. I will not go into it, now, but I think a lot is to be said about a country that is so anti-Israeli (anti-ISRAELI--not anti-JEWISH; I can't stress that enough) yet houses more Jews than any other Muslim country in the world.
#5. Short and sweet. If the Islamic Republic of Iran is so horrible, then why is it one of the largest refugee states in the world? Why do people flock there from dozens of other countries, including Iraq and Afghanistan, seeking a land of equal rights and better economic opportunity?
Reflection:
a) If the U.N. came knocking on the U.S.' door, saying we aren't allowed to have nukes, we'd laugh in their face and give them the finger, like the Patriots we are.
b) If England came back (again) and said that a democracy is not a viable form of government and that we must implement a monarchy, we'd kick their ass (for the third time).
c) We rally on an on about equal rights, but Prop 8 passed and the Equal Rights Amendment failed. Whose to say women and homosexuals have equal rights in this country?
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Dichromatic.
I dated a guy who had a blue quarter-eye. The rest of it was brown.
I loved it so I drew it.
I loved it so I drew it.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Monday, November 2, 2009
4 Conversations.
#0.
This isn't college.
I am not in a lecture hall, pretending to be taking notes about something I don't give a shit about, periodically nodding at the professor--even raising my hand here and there.
I am at school. At work. I should be working.
The classroom is empty. It's just me in here. No kids.
And I should be working on my lesson plans for the rest of the week.
But I'm not.
I am listening to Camera Obscura and getting that heartbroken wanderlust I get sometimes.
I want to run. Or drive. Or run.
#1.
"I dunno," I said. "I liked institute."
"That's cause you were never working. You always hanging out with guys," she said.
One in particular, I thought. For a second I could see his gorgeous smile, but it turned back into her stern unwelcoming face.
"Speaking of which, tell me about this guy."
"Who, Sean?"
"No. Fuck Sean. That guy I saw you hanging out with the other night."
"Oh, him."
"Yeah. Why don't you date him? Or are you already?"
"No."
She gave me a look. One of those looks that infuriates me. One of those looks that insists that I'm lying.
"I'm not. I'm not interested."
"Why not?". Her 'O' in 'not' was that wide-mouthed, annoying, Chicago 'O.' It sounded like an 'A.'
Women have trouble seeming both vulnerable AND stupid in the presence of one another. I bit my bottom lip.
What could I say?
("He's just not the man I want to see.")
#2.
The old woman smelled sweetly and the powder on her face was just a little too white. They call her Barbee. Her name is Patty and she is a Texan Rose. She really is. Pushing sixty and still just as charming as she ever was, I'm sure.
I called her a monster for turning her porch light off and turning her sprinklers on for Halloween.
"And how about you?" she asked. "Did you go out in your little French Maid outfit for a night of debauchery?"
I gasped and smiled. I could feel it like bending a dry sponge: it was the first time I had smiled all day. "No, I stayed in and watched a film." I assured her if I had a porch, I would have given candy to children, unlike some people.
"Scary movie?" she asked.
"No. I was hanging out with my friend and he didn't want to watch a scary film so we watched The Jerk."
She smiled. "Did you say 'he?'"
I nodded hesitantly.
"So that fella from Arkansas came to see you?"
I stared at her wide-eyed. I was a deer in her headlights. I shook my head, slightly. "No, we broke up."
She gasped. "What happened? Another woman?"
So I picked at the scab as I am wont to do. But only a little.
"Well, what does he do out in Arkansas?"
"He's in TFA..." Sometimes, I feel like I could be his PR agent.
"And he's unhappy?" she asked.
I nodded. I could hear his voice in my head. "It's not you, Vida."
"You're lucky," Patty said. "My first husband was that type. Always looking over the fence at the greener grass. They never appreciate what they got."
I looked down at the table. I didn't know what to say.
"Well, what about this new beau of yours?" I loved that she used words like "beau" and "fella."
I shook my head, playfully. No, not a beau.
"Uh-huh," she said with a stern playfulness.
I blushed.
What could I say?
("He's just not the man I want to see.")
#3.
He called me. Asked me to come over tonight.
Even though he is not in the room, I am shuffling my feet and trying to keep a poker face. I don't want to. I've never been there. But I don't have a good reason not to.
So he asks me all the time: "Why don't you want to come over? Why do I always come to your place? You'll drive ten hours to see someone who doesn't want to see you but you wont drive half an hour to see me?"
I was quiet.
"So, do you want to come over tonight?" he asked again. "My sister won't be there."
"So? What does that have to do with anything?"
"I don't know," he said.
"Look, I have shit to do. Maybe some other time."
He sighed, frustrated. "Really?"
What could I say?
("You're just not the man I want to see.")
#4.
"Colin left?"
I smiled and said cheerfully, "Yes, he left a while ago!"
"Alright, well, Goodnight." He always says it so suddenly.
"Wait. Did you think of when you might come here?"
"We're not talking about that."
Things like that make you feel like your lungs are deflating too fast and are writhing into your stomach.
"Why not?"
"We're just not."
Don't fight. Don't fight. Don't fight. He always wanted you to shut your mouth. Just shut it for once.
"Okay." It was resolute but not cathartic--like throwing up, but swallowing it after.
"Goodnight."
"Goodnight."
What could I say?
("You're just the man I want to see.")
This isn't college.
I am not in a lecture hall, pretending to be taking notes about something I don't give a shit about, periodically nodding at the professor--even raising my hand here and there.
I am at school. At work. I should be working.
The classroom is empty. It's just me in here. No kids.
And I should be working on my lesson plans for the rest of the week.
But I'm not.
I am listening to Camera Obscura and getting that heartbroken wanderlust I get sometimes.
I want to run. Or drive. Or run.
#1.
"I dunno," I said. "I liked institute."
"That's cause you were never working. You always hanging out with guys," she said.
One in particular, I thought. For a second I could see his gorgeous smile, but it turned back into her stern unwelcoming face.
"Speaking of which, tell me about this guy."
"Who, Sean?"
"No. Fuck Sean. That guy I saw you hanging out with the other night."
"Oh, him."
"Yeah. Why don't you date him? Or are you already?"
"No."
She gave me a look. One of those looks that infuriates me. One of those looks that insists that I'm lying.
"I'm not. I'm not interested."
"Why not?". Her 'O' in 'not' was that wide-mouthed, annoying, Chicago 'O.' It sounded like an 'A.'
Women have trouble seeming both vulnerable AND stupid in the presence of one another. I bit my bottom lip.
What could I say?
("He's just not the man I want to see.")
#2.
The old woman smelled sweetly and the powder on her face was just a little too white. They call her Barbee. Her name is Patty and she is a Texan Rose. She really is. Pushing sixty and still just as charming as she ever was, I'm sure.
I called her a monster for turning her porch light off and turning her sprinklers on for Halloween.
"And how about you?" she asked. "Did you go out in your little French Maid outfit for a night of debauchery?"
I gasped and smiled. I could feel it like bending a dry sponge: it was the first time I had smiled all day. "No, I stayed in and watched a film." I assured her if I had a porch, I would have given candy to children, unlike some people.
"Scary movie?" she asked.
"No. I was hanging out with my friend and he didn't want to watch a scary film so we watched The Jerk."
She smiled. "Did you say 'he?'"
I nodded hesitantly.
"So that fella from Arkansas came to see you?"
I stared at her wide-eyed. I was a deer in her headlights. I shook my head, slightly. "No, we broke up."
She gasped. "What happened? Another woman?"
So I picked at the scab as I am wont to do. But only a little.
"Well, what does he do out in Arkansas?"
"He's in TFA..." Sometimes, I feel like I could be his PR agent.
"And he's unhappy?" she asked.
I nodded. I could hear his voice in my head. "It's not you, Vida."
"You're lucky," Patty said. "My first husband was that type. Always looking over the fence at the greener grass. They never appreciate what they got."
I looked down at the table. I didn't know what to say.
"Well, what about this new beau of yours?" I loved that she used words like "beau" and "fella."
I shook my head, playfully. No, not a beau.
"Uh-huh," she said with a stern playfulness.
I blushed.
What could I say?
("He's just not the man I want to see.")
#3.
He called me. Asked me to come over tonight.
Even though he is not in the room, I am shuffling my feet and trying to keep a poker face. I don't want to. I've never been there. But I don't have a good reason not to.
So he asks me all the time: "Why don't you want to come over? Why do I always come to your place? You'll drive ten hours to see someone who doesn't want to see you but you wont drive half an hour to see me?"
I was quiet.
"So, do you want to come over tonight?" he asked again. "My sister won't be there."
"So? What does that have to do with anything?"
"I don't know," he said.
"Look, I have shit to do. Maybe some other time."
He sighed, frustrated. "Really?"
What could I say?
("You're just not the man I want to see.")
#4.
"Colin left?"
I smiled and said cheerfully, "Yes, he left a while ago!"
"Alright, well, Goodnight." He always says it so suddenly.
"Wait. Did you think of when you might come here?"
"We're not talking about that."
Things like that make you feel like your lungs are deflating too fast and are writhing into your stomach.
"Why not?"
"We're just not."
Don't fight. Don't fight. Don't fight. He always wanted you to shut your mouth. Just shut it for once.
"Okay." It was resolute but not cathartic--like throwing up, but swallowing it after.
"Goodnight."
"Goodnight."
What could I say?
("You're just the man I want to see.")
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
