Entries Tagged 'Unaskedfor Advice' ↓

Yesterday I celebrated my first year-anniversary of moving to Seattle, and was convinced (after a couple of glasses of wine) to accept a free tarot reading.

Now, first off, I don’t believe one bit in psychic nonsense. I consider it simply another form of therapy or counseling, albeit with someone who doesn’t have any sort of “serious” book-learning. Granted, there likely are a fair amount of counselors and therapists who also have no serious qualifications.

Anyways.

The first card, which was supposed to represent me, was The Hermit, which described me fairly well. The second, to represent where I want to be, was the Princess of Cups. Also fairly accurate. The third, to represent my movement from my current situation towards where I want to be, was the Prince of Wands. The fourth, to represent the method by which I proceed towards my goal, was the Eight of Cups (Indolence). The explanation for this was fairly redundant with that of the Prince of Wands.

Finally, the “outcome card” was The Chariot which has a nice little description:

The Chariot alerts us to the fact that a conflict is arising. However, it also gives us confidence in our ability to meet it and defeat it. Energy, will power, and resolution are available. If all resources are focused on the job at hand the potential for success is high.

In the card a knight stands ready to fight. He has many shields behind him, representing the many battles he has won. Two watches stand on either side of him representing conflicting emotions or planes of thought. The promise of success is within his grasp, as portrayed by the rich green palm fronds in front of him.

Essentially, the summary version of his interpretation is that I am in a difficult situation and must remain emotionally strong to work my way through it to eventual success. Pretty good advice for just about any situation, really, and it has served me well this last year.

All in all, it was an amusing / entertaining little ritual to be involved in and I recommend you try it out if given the opportunity. I could certainly see how people who are less grounded than I may be taken in by it. The question I asked will remain triple-x top secret, but the fellow doing the reading did a good job of interpreting my reactions to various things and all in all told me what I wanted to hear. I am pleased.

Dan Savage has a great post entitled What Straight People Can Learn About Marriage From Gay People which tackles statistics about reported relationship-happiness of straight vs. gay couples.

The part I am more interested in, is the last bit:

But there’s something I’d like to see these researchers address, and it’s an issue that’s sure to drive both fundies and some in the gay rights movements up the wall: monogamy.

Male same-sex couples in long-term relationships report higher levels of satisfaction, are better at resolving conflict, have less destructive argument styles, share house work more equitably, etc. We’re also a hell of lot less likely to be strictly monogamous. Many gay male couples have negotiated “agreements” about outside sexual contact (scope, frequency, safety, etc). Reading these reports I can’t help but wonder what impact, if any, the lesser emphasis gay men place on monogamy has on relationships. Does talking about and defusing one of the chief sources of marital strife—attraction to others; the desire, acknowledged or not, for a sexual variety over the life of a multi-decade partnership—contribute to higher rates of relationship satisfaction? Do gay male couples report less conflict than straight couples because fewer gay couples are conflict—or denial—about outside sexual contacts?

I would say that monogamy itself likely doesn’t have a direct impact on relationship satisfaction — cheating on your wife isn’t going to make you any happier if you are in an unhappy monogamous relationship — but that the idea of monogamy is in itself not something which a majority of people are capable of living up to. In my (admittedly limited) experience, monogamy is simply a given in heterosexual relationships — an assumed benefit of staking ones claim on another.

Why is monogamy seen as beneficial?

Hundreds of years ago, it was important to establish and secure lineage. Today, perhaps to avoid child support payments (but that’s what we have Maury Povich for.)

Perhaps to avoid transmission of disease, though one could easily limit non-monogamous sexual activity with clean and healthy individuals. Driving those who feel trapped by a monogamous relationship to fulfilling their sexual needs in secret with potentially unsavory characters clearly is not more beneficial than having an open relationship in which those needs can be understood and safely fulfilled.

A serious issue I have with the assumption of monogamy is the implied ownership of one by another. The traditional marriage vows are blatant in their implications of ownership, and a wedding ring had might as well be a collar with an “if lost, please return to spouse” tag on it. Jealousy is a good indicator of whether or not you are being trapped by a traditional ownership viewpoint. If you are jealous of someone for attracting the attention of your spouse or romantic-interest, you are upset that their attention (which you claim as your own) is being taken by someone else. That your property is in their hands. If you feel jealous and aren’t horrified / ashamed of that jealousy, you need to take a serious look at exactly what your significant-other means to you. Are they your property, or a free and whole human with their own interests, desires, and needs?

Granted, that certain individuals and couples understand themselves, each other, and their relationship together well enough to be able to enjoy a committed monogamous (and EQUAL) relationship, but I would wager that they are the exception and not the rule. See the 50% divorce rate. If you count yourself amongst the exceptions, I congratulate you.

Or, it could simply be as a commenter on Dan Savage’s post suggested:

No. It’s because gay means happy.

It is your responsibility to protect yourself and those you care about. It is not the responsibility of the police to protect you from anything. They are not knights in shining armor — they are often the janitors who clean up after the crime is committed. They are not legally culpable for crimes being committed and not legally held responsible — rarely even for crimes they commit themselves.

And so, in these great states you must fight for your right — your responsibility — to protect yourself. Minnesota and Washington are both “shall issue” states. This means that the Sheriff “shall issue” handgun conceal/carry permits to all who apply, unless there is danger in doing so as defined by law. Typically the danger is described as a history of mental illness, violent criminal convictions (including domestic abuse), etc. This is to prevent the crazies and crooks from getting permits to carry guns. Of course, they will carry anyhow if they have one, but won’t be doing so legally.

What does it mean if you don’t live in a “shall issue” state? It means that the Sheriff may — and most often will — deny your request for a conceal/carry permit for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Before Minnesota passed its “shall issue” law in 2002 or 2003, Hennepin County Sheriffs would refuse anyone without a law enforcement background regardless of an absolute lack of criminal record, mental illness, or any reasonable reason to deny a permit. The logic is nonexistent.

I got home today and read the following on SLOG:

So last night, I was innocently minding my own business (and maybe a little bit of the business of my friendly companion) when I experienced the most terrifying interaction I have ever had with a street person.

I was walking on Broadway to the Harvard Exit to see Persepolis and I was walking in front of the old, closed down QFC. A man approached me and asked if he could have some money. He was about 6’3”, Asian or Native, and wearing the typical uniform of a street person—dirty baggy clothes of an indeterminate blue-green-grey-brown-tan.

I refused to give him any money. Walking down Broadway, I’d already been asked for money four times. I didn’t have any money to give. Just cards. And, in any case, I don’t give panhandlers money. Sometimes I will buy traveling kids some food, but that’s it.

In any case, he began to follow me, calling me names.

“Fuck you, bitch!”

I rolled my head back on my neck and groaned to my companion. I can deal with “Fuck you, bitch.”

“You fucking slut!”

Again, been there, done that.

“I’m gonna…”

This is where it started to get truly obnoxious.

“I’m gonna grease your asscrack up with Vaseline and fuck you like the bitch you are!”

This is the part of the conversation where, if I had been born the way God originally planned, I would have reared my big fucking tall head around, asked this motherfucker to repeat himself, and when he did, beat the living shit out of him.

But through some freak accident, I was born into the body of a tiny little girl. And we were late for the movie. And my friend is probably not into confrontation (I didn’t ask). So I did nothing. I just kept walking.

I regret it. Generally, I don’t like to let people get away with threatening to violently rape me.

But here’s where I start to run into problems: What could I have done? Told him off? Probably a bad idea. He was obviously fucked-up and a lot bigger than me and my friend. Called the cops? Then, I would have had to wait until they got there to give a statement, if they ever came. What if he just walked away while I sat in Pagliacci’s and waited?

They all seem like dead ends. The only thing I could come up with is taking a picture of him with my cameraphone next time I see him and putting it on Slog.

This is absolutely abhorrent, particularly with the recent shootings and stabbings in Capitol Hill and nearby. If the Seattle PD doesn’t take unprovoked threats of violence seriously, no one should expect them to take actual violence seriously. No one will protect you from this guy or others. You must take into your own hands the responsibility to protect your life (and/or anal virginity.) Buy a pistol. If you live in a “shall issue” state, get yourself a conceal/carry license. Learn how to use it. Visit a pistol range often to get comfortable with it. Learn how and when not to use it.

As stated by someone in the comments of that post, someone who has less to lose than you is a potential threat — especially when they are threatening to rape you. Do not settle for pissing them off by attempting to spray their eyes with pepper spray unless you don’t feel capable of carrying (legally) a gun. In either case, you must follow through with reporting the incident to the police. Failure to do so is a breach in your responsibility to maintaining the safety of your community. Standing by and doing nothing when someone is violently threatened is a breach in your responsibility as an onlooker. The streets will be ruled by Those People™ unless law-abiding citizens stand together united against them. But first, individuals must be willing to stand up, themselves, to the trash that threatens their safety.

Learn the law. Arm yourselves. Defend yourselves, then we may defend ourselves.

In related news, Friday morning I will be applying for my Washington conceal/carry permit.

The very idea of “affordable housing” (with quotes) is nonsensical. It circumvents market forces to offer rental property to people at half the actual price, but with a renter-salary cap. When I was planning my move to Seattle I encountered several nice apartments (such as a little studio in Pioneer Square) which I was unable to move into because I didn’t make low-enough of a salary. That’s idiotic. If I move to New York City and want to live downtown but make only $40,000 / year, I shouldn’t live downtown.

There is already affordable housing — without the quotes. It exists in the suburbs. If you don’t make enough money to be able to afford living downtown, live in the suburbs and commute until you can afford living in the city. If you think you will never be able to afford it, you need to take a moment to consider exactly why that is.

Everyone should have a five-year plan which includes improving their financial situation. Accepting undeserved hand-outs should never be a part of that plan. For the record, making minimum wage (or less) does not make someone any more deserving than does being related to a dead rich white guy. The “lack” of “affordable housing” is not an issue. The lack of forethought / planning and intelligent decisions on the part of people in the market to rent, is. Rather than bribing developers like Vulcan with “affordable housing” requirements, educate the renting masses in how best to plan their lives and let the housing market take care of the housing market.

A friend of mine — we’ll call him “Patrick” — has been angsty lately due to coming to the realization that our existence is pointless in the universe-level context. Well, duh. We are infinitesimally small and insignificant compared to the physical universe and “the universe” in quotes. Whether we live or die as a species means nothing to the billions of billions of billions of billions of stars, planets, solar systems, galaxies, perhaps even universes that reality consists of. Whether we do anything as individuals means even less..

..and that’s fine.

The relative pointlessness of our existence is a reality. We cannot alter reality. Instead, in order to live fulfilling lives — for the relative fraction of a nanosecond we do exist — we must learn what it is that makes us happy as individuals and strive towards that end. Barring physiological limitations, each person has something which makes them happy and for which they wake up in the morning.

An easy answer for many is family and friends. While that could be considered noble, to place your self-worth entirely in the hands of others is potentially dangerous. Not everything we aspire to must be easily accomplished, so don’t take a shortcut in an attempt to reach enlightenment (sotospeak) at the risk of being torn down (intentionally or not) by the others you rely so heavily upon.

Reality is important, but our perception of reality is upon which we base our existences. To turn the power of perception over to others (cough, religion, cough) we surrender our wills, and our lives to those others. That is not noble. It is stupid, lazy, (at best) misguided.