(take off your stockings, baby, 'cause the night's gettin' warm)
I should not have to remind you, dear and precious readers, that this site is a work of fiction (re. the other day's post
Sure, there are portions of my life extracted and forced into each post, to provide some structure and to give a sense of time's passing, but that's all.
Nowhere am I being more fictional as when I am talking about work, love, or myself.
Assume that I am lying and we will all be much happier, and also disappointed.
Well, not lying, that word has achieved an aura of nastiness that we need not address here. We'll just all agree that there exists a certain layer of mendacity to any undertaking such as this, and I am only your beguiling guide.
There are people that I have known where the condition is the case, where everything they say is a lie. I've realized that the way for me to get along with them, or to even negotiate my way through life in proximity to them, was to assume that every single word spoken by them was a lie.
There are those who are incapable of forthright and complete honesty, in any form. I don't just mean an untruth, either - an unpremeditated mis-telling, or an augmentation of the events for the purpose of storytelling - I mean an intentional lie, a schematic of deception told for unknown reasons and to unknown personal effect, though to often undesirable results.
In time, the only thing that I was able to derive from this understanding of them was that it must have given the teller, the liar, some sense of superiority over others. To feel that they were somehow "duping" them into believing something that only they, superior they, knew not to be true.
Odd, that. Where a sense of immediate superiority over others became valued more than an overarching sense of value of worth in the relationship.
I am all for an augmenting of the truth, perhaps even too much. Many stories need a touch of fantasy, to make them less unpleasant. But the purpose of augmenting the truth in storytelling is often to tell a greater truth, I think. Or, to shift emphasis away from the actual blame, or expected guilt, of either self or another, to make comedic a tale that might have too much gravity for a pleasant or informative relaying of events.
Those stories that need some buffering, some mythologizing, or softening.
Speaking of the sometimes tenuous relationship between writing and truth, below is an excerpt I wrote but did not publish a few days ago.
It would have been titled, "Everybody Loves a Puppy!"
Talking with an online friend on the phone cheered me a bit, and I needed it. He joked about choking young boys for sexual pleasure and the many joys of NAMBLA.
Not his own pleasure, but the presumable pleasure in it for others.
He made a good point: Why do we deny attraction to youth as if it is among the most awful things imaginable. It is, instead, one of the most natural impulses any animal can have. Perfectly natural.
That, and devouring another animal to survive, of course.
Anybody that would openly deny that youth is sexually attractive is retarded, says my friend.
Everybody loves a puppy!
Deviance and Love are indistinguishable, he openly reasoned, Commitment is imaginary and neurotic.
He pointed out that in the animal kingdom the youngest males of the species will fight for the sex and the playful companionship of the older females; the ones who are nearing, or past, the end of their ability to produce offspring.
There is nothing that males desire more than an aged member of the same species. Every young man is drawn to the oldest in the group. That's science.
Even the older males, well past their prime, will fight to the death for the youngest females and the ones most likely to produce offspring, the ones who have just recently become viable mates, physically.
Vitality is a highly valued sexual component.
Just look around with honest eyes and you will note this.
In the human animal, imagination takes the place of physical vitality, and is treasured accordingly, we're told.
With almost everybody I know wanting to "live healthy" and return to a more natural way of being, in tune with our real, true selves… Well, I don't hear many arguing for getting rid of the laws which "protect" minors from "predators."
They are not predators if their intention is to impregnate their youthful counterparts, then care for the offspring. If no offspring result from the union then that need not be denounced. It is the natural way of things.
Well, there is no end to the logical inconsistencies you'll find if you just stop and ask yourself some honest questions about it.
That is just where reasoning has brought us today.
You might hear some say that this naturalness is an abomination, and the "perpetrators" are vile, wicked fiends. It doesn't take much observation to disagree.
I'm quite sure there have been studies that reflect that most male heterosexual men will be come aroused if shown images of suggestive pubescent girls, and the same would be true for homosexual men with/for pubescent boys.
It is when women come into play that things go terribly wrong, because they are primarily attracted to men who can provide for them, which defies the immediacy of nature in a significant way.
They might notice a boy, but providers really melt their butter. Though melter butter does not survive through either summer or winter, not well, anyway.
Some would say that I am wrong for even stating such a thing, but I don't think so. You see, men are oft reminded how awful and wrong and unnatural they are. When seen in the comparative light of actual nature, they are far more natural than their feminine counterparts.
I would go so far as to say that even pregnancy should no longer be entrusted solely to women.
I'll save male pregnancy as a topic for a later post.
We are told that this sexual deviance - the recognition of youth as a component of sexual vitality - well… these abominators, have a deep-rooted predisposition that does not change.
They can not be reformed.
That sounds about right, to me.
Just assume, for the purpose of purpose, that we're talking about baboons, not humans.
The facts become a little easier to digest if you remove the sexually active girl who lives down the street, 14 year old Lilac, from the equation. But it shouldn't have to. No person who wishes to understand themselves, or other humans, would deny such a primal component of our evolutionary makeup. It is perfectly natural.
Do scientists spend much time trying to heal baboons that engage in sexual activity with the younger members of the group? Perhaps the Christian Scientists, but those would likely be the only ones. Scientologists, maybe.
But I suppose that evolutionary forces play a role in the disgust that some must feel from such a thing, also. Because, as Richard Dawkins taught us, we wish to maintain the health of the group, and an older male mating with a younger female creates a less that preferable outcome for the survival and well-being of the offspring, and by turn, the group in general.
Though it does seem that the repulsion is out of step with the actuality of the act, and morality offers precious little evolutionary advantage here. It is mostly a function, and by-product, of excessive imagination, which has its charms, tough suffers in its usage.
Now, I am not arguing for sex with minors. I shouldn't even have to. All that I am doing is pointing out that there is nothing unnatural about it, up to a point. But the legal line that has been drawn is an indiscriminate one and not all cultures share or recognize those same set of standards. But the punishment for crossing that line is hugely incommensurate with the presumed damage done, though many who have built a career on "preying" on these same victims would angrily disagree.
Magically, all of their hard work and study in the field of child sexual abuse victims evaporates in another culture where 14 is the age that you're expected to get married and be sexually active, almost exclusively with older males.
Somehow the psychic repercussions of the act disappear in that culture.
But surround a young adult with a bunch of concerned specialists who have careers in helping them recover from trauma, and voila, trauma emerges.
Now, that piece was unfinished, friends. It is up to you to decide how much of that is (un)acceptable fiction, and how much of it plain (un)truth.