Twitterpated forever?

A friend of mine posts a daily "question of the day" spurring his friends to think about random things that aren't political for at least a small moment. It's a great tradition, but today's really got me riled up. It was a simple one: Do you believe in love at first sight?

It should not have surprised me to see the responses. Most people who said "yes" were wide-eyed optimist types who dream of hopeless romance. Everyone else fell somewhere in the "no" or "lust at first sight" category. Some went so far as to explain their reasoning, many with very accurate facts, like "relationships being work" and "true love means knowing the worst of someone and loving them anyway." I can't really disagree with any of those things, but where I do find fault is that one negates the other.

Love at first sight is very real. Nearly every single person on this planet can point to times when they have met someone who stirs their soul for no quantifiable reason. It is easy to assume that this feeling is just when someone inspires in us lust, but if you look, there is a distinct difference between randomly finding someone attractive to the eyes, and someone who seems to tug on your heart and soul.

I have learned to recognize this to mean that this person will be important to my life. Some have become my best friends. Some have led to relationships. Most haven't stood the test of time, and many turned out to be painful, but in each instance there was an undeniable love present.

Where the romantic poets have gotten us lost is in assuming that "love at first sight" means "I recognize my soulmate at first sight." This is where the paths diverge. It is true that only through time and effort that we are able to strengthen a relationship to the point where it can become "permanent." When we experience the feeling of love at first sight, (a feeling that as a child of the 80's one might say makes us feel twitterpated) we quickly lose it, but not for the reasons that seem obvious. We lose it because we often add expectation on top of it. By assuming that it has to be forever, and when it's not (as most things aren't) we lose our optimism and assume that there's no such thing, closing ourselves off more and more as time goes on.

In that first moment, what we recognize is potential. When you allow yourself to become aware of what you're seeing and feeling you an embrace the fact that someone can be meaningful and can be someone you love without putting on the mandate that they will be your one and only forever. Don't assume that your heart is "wrong" because the last time you felt that magic turned out to be less than you had expected. All you do is make it that much harder for that person to be who they were meant to be in your life.

Cherish those moments and those people. Enjoy the fact that you've found someone who will be important to your life and celebrate in whatever that becomes. You may or may not walk down the aisle with them, but rest assured your life needs them in it, and they need you in theirs.

New Year, New Beginnings?

It's that time of year again. The time when people celebrate the successes and lament over the failures they've had over the last year. Most of us take a moment to think about the year ahead, and all the brightness we hope it will bring.

One general theme that is present as the year ends is summed up by a catch-phrase that Nate has started to use: "New Year, New Beginnings." This is a great one for us, given that the year is ending with much of our lives in upheaval, and the prospect of starting fresh is incredibly appealing. Having many friends in the same position, I feel this gloom-to-optimism sentimentality all around. One has to wonder though, is this actually true? Is the New Year actually a New Beginning?

I am a big fan of retrospective technology these days. Using Timehop, Facebook, and Google, I am regularly reminded of what has come before. For the first time, as I looked back upon this year, I also looked back on this day- December 31st- for the last several years. Given my passion for startups it may be not entirely surprising that out of the last 10 New Year's Eves, I have been unemployed 5 of them. I was single for 7 of them. Each year, no matter what, I made a blog, status, or the like indicating how excited I was for the upcoming year. Each year- like so many others- I started out the year with a bang. New health, more passion, more action. Each year I moved leaps and bounds over where I was just a few days before. Despite this, so many of those years I ended up back in the same position. Looking back, the same thing has happened to so many others.

So back to the question. Are new years, actually new beginnings? If the patterns keep repeating, are we actually starting fresh? Moreover, is it helpful that we fall into the same cycle? Perhaps strangely, I think the answer is "yes."

I strongly believe the slightly annoying truth of the universe is that it proves what you need, not what you want. Humans are inherently creatures of habit, and often it takes times of darkness to move us from the grey our lives have become to the light that they truly can be. I think that we are inherently led towards change and upheaval towards the end of the year. Whether it is our sub-conscious, or a greater power taking a hand, the simple fact of the matter is that we need renewal, and so we get it- the kicking and screaming that may follow be damned.

Like nature- which must go through the winter and cycle of seeming lifelessness- so too must some aspects of our life wither or die in order for us to renew them or another aspect of ourselves. Ended relationships often create a renewed focus on ourselves. We're normally driven to be more healthier and look after ourselves. Many times we also renew the relationships with our friends that we may have neglected. Lost jobs force us to focus on our life and many times we see moments where we may have given up our passions in favor of our paychecks. These traumatic events can't- and shouldn't- happen all the time, but the renewal should.

New Year's Eve falls at a perfect time to create these feelings in us, even when things seem to be going well. We have just come off the holidays, which seem to almost always be an insane mix of happiness/nostalgia, and pain/angst. We get closer to our families and friends, while also realizing everything about them that drives us insane. It's a time of high stress, putting our relationships on a thin line, and our jobs more easily prove how much or little they seem to care about the people running their day-to-day. Is it any wonder that we always end the year looking for something better?

In short, New Year's Eve is a needed reset. It's incredibly valuable to take the time to reset ourselves. Even knowing that we'll likely do the exact same thing next year, and that we'll probably not do all the great things we set out to do starting tomorrow, its value is still absolute. Take the time to look back and see what you want to add to your life. See what you want to throw away. Become excited about the things that will change, but also work to ensure that what was amazing about the year isn't lost. Enjoy the roller coaster you rode in 2015, then be excited for 2016 and the roller coaster you know it will certainly be, new beginnings and all.

Working Relationships

When Fab did it's first round of lay-offs I started coming to a strong realization. Someone off-handedly mentioned that "A job is just like a relationship. It takes two people to start  it, but only one to end it." This is definitely a true statement, but as the months progressed, more lay-offs happened and my own job was impacted, the correlation between jobs and friendships or romantic relationships became even more apparent. It also became very clear that often we can often create problems for ourselves by not realizing how incredibly similar these are and acting accordingly.

The night before what we affectionately called "The Reaping" at Fab, I knew my job was affected. Caleb in an effort to make me feel better made a "Fab Breakup" Spotify playlist, and I was again floored by how perfectly these songs of love an angst perfectly fit with how I was feeling. I even felt the wide range of upheaval. I was disbelieving with All or Nothing moved straight on to sadness with Believe and the next day was sure nothing fit my anger so well as Not Ready to Make Nice. It was clear that I was emotionally affected, and I was responding as though I had my heart broken, because really, I had.

Looking back, I realize that not all jobs ending were heartbreaking, but then again neither were all relationships. Sometimes the passion just fizzles. You drift apart. It might take a couple months for one or the other of you to make the break, but really you don't feel hurt, because your feelings had long since evaporated. Much like some relationships we can all think of, some of us cling to our jobs far too long the same way we do bad relationships.

The similarities don't end at breaking up. Dating is also eerily similar. One thing I know about myself with my romantic relationships is that when I'm not seeing someone, I am always on the hunt. When I get with someone, that desire to hunt actually leaves me. It's a sign of every successful relationship I've had when this happens. If I start looking, I know I'm not invested, and it's time to go. I realize I do the same thing with my jobs. While I was at Fab, I never looked for another job. I knew I wasn't paid near what I was worth, but I was committed, and overall happy with where I was. Sure, there might be a cuter boy aka job around the corner, but my heart was already taken.

When we meet someone knew, we sometimes refer to their relationship "resume" or "how they look on paper." We have taken this idea from our professional relationship, and applied it to dating, likely without realizing how much the reverse was true. We run into the same problems. "I mean sure, you have a cute office, but your office manager is insane!" is so similar to "You're adorable, but your best friend is off her rocker!" We also have to see how we fit in. "Wow. Suits? I haven't worn a suit to work in years..." and "So you only go to sports bars..." might be ways in which we might not fit with something even if it's great. We need to match, and we need the complete package, but like who we date, not just on paper.

After Fab and I broke up, I went hunting, but realized that I could only be somewhere that I was intensely passionate about. Job postings came from friends that I barely even read. I appreciated the sentiment, but much like my complete disinterest in dating without the prospect of a future husband, but knew I couldn't just settle for something that paid the bills for now. I needed something that would steal my heart. I knew I could probably go and hook up with a company and a nice paycheck pretty quickly, but what's the point if I'm not invested?

When you look at it, our lives are all wrapped up in relationships. We have a relationship with our partners, our jobs, our friends. Humans like familiarity, and so we attach the same emotions, and the same habits to them. Already scoping the guy across the room by your second date? Bet you keep yourself subscribed to your LinkedIn job alerts as well. Dive head first into your work? Bet when you find a relationship you do the same there. We sometimes feel that one or the other might help us "escape" from the other. "I need a break from my love life. I will throw myself into work to distract myself." This of course can only work temporarily, because you bring your same issues to the escape that you had in your problem area. Ever notice that you get mad at your boss for some of the same things as your spouse? Because in your head, it's a very similar thing.

Trying to separate how we react to one relationship vs. the other can create a lot of problems. You may not feel your "heart flutter" when you walk into your office, but if you live a passionless existence at work, you'll be as unhappy as you would be if you led one at home. Learning to embrace the fact that we engage in relationships with everything that we do and treating our jobs as carefully as we treat our love lives will always pan out for us better in the long run.

How do you like your eggs?

The thoughts of this dreary Sunday were given a new direction when my roommate decided that a good use of our time would be watching "Runaway Bride." Despite my love of Julia Roberts and romantic comedies in general, I had never actually seen this film. It was indeed enjoyable and a good counter-agent to the gloominess that was permeating my day. Once the movie was over, I felt a theme resonate with me, and the more I thought about it, the more aspects of relationships seemed to tie into this.

The theme is simply ones self. In the movie, it comes out that Robert's character has never settled into who she is and what she wants. Her engagements alwats come with her acting in a way that she can be who they want. This is artfully demonstrated by the fact that each former suitor claims that she likes her eggs the same way that they do. By the end, Roberts realizes that she in fact likes her eggs completely differently from all the guys she had been with. (Her finally landing on loving Eggs Benedict certainly gets a thumbs up from me).

I have talked before about the statement that people often need to get themselves together before they can be in a real relationship. I have often debunked this notion. This movie in some ways challenged my thoughts, but in the end, actually only strengthen my argument. People don't need their lives to be in order. If anything a relationship can often be a catalyst to taking our lives to new heights and bringing in line some of the loose edges that we allow to creep up in your singledom. What we do have to have is our sense of self.

I have seen many people run from relationships because "they weren't in the right place." While sometimes this is indeed true, often it is simply an excuse to continue to live in fear and run away from something serious or potentially painful or difficult. What if often overlooked is when people aren't actually ready, because they don't know themselves. They can't decide what type of eggs to order, what makes them truly happy. No other person is going to provide the pieces to our cosmic puzzle if we don't know what kind of pictures we want our pieced together puzzle to look like. When we seek out people to give us meaning or definition to our lives, we simply assume their meaning and definitions, or assume those that they are looking for. This can never make us happy, because we aren't fitting with what we need.

People weren't meant to create their personalities to fit someone else, or to become someone's mirror, though we all know people who often fall into this trap. I hold that a real relationship is "perfect" when two people come together with their individual wants and needs, and somehow with all that held within them, somehow mesh. Sometimes this means similar wants and needs, sometimes it's just when they work out. I would never need a guy who would love to wolf down my Eggs Benedict, but he better be as happy with my love of them as I am with his Country Scramble. Who knows if we will find a person who will make the same order we do. What matters is if we're both happy with the choices that each makes for themselves, and more importantly, the fact that they know what it is that they want to order.

Do we choose our friends?

It is interesting what circumstances will do to your life that you don't expect. For example, who would imagine that going through a hard break up would make me take stock of my friends? Perhaps the universe decided that it was simply a great opportunity to address this issue, or it could be- as my friend informed me- a bi-product of turning 30 this year. Regardless, I have looked at the people in my life, and those that are noticeably missing, and more than anything I have to wonder how much we really choose our friends.

We have all had experiences where someone we are close to has friends that no one around them can understand. What do they see in that person? What is the basis for their friendship? The scary answer might be that for many "friends" that we have, the answer to the latter is "nothing."A long time ago, a friend told me that often times those we call friends are more often than not "friends of convenience." He said that only those rarest of friends are actually what one might consider a "true" friend. Do we really just end up with people we call our friends because they are around all the time? Doing so takes away the depth of our friendships as well as the choice that we have, leading us to look around at the people in our life and asking "How did I end up with these friends?"

I am a friendly guy. I make friends quickly. I also am social enough that many of my friends meet one another. Lately I have looked at some of the friendships that have spawned from that and wondered "Why?" The sad fact may simply be that many of them become friends simply because they are at the same bar with the same people. How can you not be friends with someone you see all the time? I am just as guilty of the "friend by association" phenomenon. When you make friends with in a circle, it's hard not to take on all the others too. Sometimes this can be a great thing. Adding to your circle of friends can make everyone happy, and enhance all of your lives. The problem comes when it just happens because it happens, not because we're making a conscious decision to hold these people in our lives.

There is of course nothing wrong with making a lot of friends and being friendly. The problem comes when we fail to separate those whom we can enjoy and be friendly with and those who are the true friends in our lives. The most important distinction that should appear is time. One thing I realized is that often I would end up spending times with a bunch of random acquaintances and not near as much with those who are truly good friends. This has led me to miss out on some great friendships, and from deepening the ones that I have. If we look at someone we call a friend and we can't figure out a reason for us to be friends, chances are we should be looking at them as an acquaintance and give each other the attention that title deserves. Forgetting this can become a serious problem, and also lead to sort of a revolving door of friends constantly passing in and out of our lives.

The other negative side to this coin is in people that we should be friends with. There are a few people in particular that I knew the moment I met them and talked to them that we would make great friends. The fact of the matter is that often I never deepened our relationship, completely due to circumstances. If I were to compare that to a romantic interest, it is the exact opposite of what I would do. Seems silly to have such a dichotomy about things that are truly very similar. We wouldn't simply be in a relationship with someone because they were there. Why would we do the same with friendships?

When we meet people, there is always some sort of chemistry. We talk about this a lot when we look at romantic relationships, but friendships are really no different. One friend of mine called me his intellectual soul mate. He and I will never share a bed, but in the meeting of minds we connect on an incredibly deep level. By ignoring these connections and allowing ourselves to hang out with whomever is around, we in effect are doing no more for ourselves than we would if all we did was go on casual dates with everyone we met.

Friendships are a form of relationships. Unlike those we have with our families, and those we fall in love with, we truly have complete choice in who we are friends with. We need to remember this and allow ourselves to have truly powerful relationships in this area of our life as well. Convenient friends are... well... convenient. The fact of the matter is that when it comes down to it, they will rarely bring anything to your life, nor you to theirs. They are filler space, and that makes us filler space to them as well. Much like empty calories, they are fine in moderation, but if that's all we're partaking in, we are never going to be very healthy.

Are we our future selves?

Last night I went to the reading of a play called "Billy Redden." While the reading itself went really well and was very entertaining, the thoughts that the play invokes run far deeper than the average performance, and its themes were vastly different than what one can normally see. I also saw "Falling for Eve" this weekend which was a new twist on the Adam and Eve story. Interestingly enough, both these plays touch upon the choices we make in our lives and in free-will.

While I will try not to ruin everything, I am not sure I can write out all my thoughts without spoilers. If you hate that, you may want to move along.

So the basic premise of the first play is this 13-year-old boy who is visited one night by his future selves from every 13 year interval going forward all the way up to a 78-year-old version. Each of these "selves" of course has also experienced this same night every 13 years, and based upon their current place in their lives have varied opinions on the night itself and what it means to "them."

The most moving character throughout most of the play is the 26-year-old (nicknamed "Red"). He is furious most of the night. He feels as though he is forced into areas of his life not by choice, but by the machinations of his older selves. He sees this night for him 13 years ago as a catalyst that took away his choice and he is determined to take it back. He encourages his younger self that he always has a choice, and pushes him to see that he can "break the cycle" and not become what he sees before him.

His anger really sets up the main issue within the play, and the foremost question I think about having left it. What choice do we have in our lives when looking at ourselves in the future. If you were able to meet yourself and see that you become a drunk, would you change it? Could you change it? Many of us believe absolutely in free-will, but when you're faced with yourself it is presumed that these are your choices. Does seeing what you will be allow you to change your future choices? Can you be something other than your current path will allow you to be?

This question often comes up when you wax philosophical about time travel or prophesy. While this may not seem as a pertinent line of thought in today's modern world, it allows us to look at things that have far more to do with who we are and the way we act than it does of the disbelief we may have over why this would ever come about. Religiously the questions are even more pertinent. If God is all-knowing, what choices do you have? Is it possible that you have the ability to make whatever choices you want, but God simply knows what they are? If that's the case, are there times where Divine intervention might not be implemented to encourage a different choice? Is there a such thing as fate? If so, how can you possibly actually have the free-will we seem to cling to so much?

Like many, I believe in free-will completely. I think that every choice I make is my own. That said, I also believe in fate (you could also say Divine plans if you're so inclined). How I reconcile this is that fate provides us with opportunities, and at times in our life may become more active in putting things in our way, or helping us out when we need it. The fact of the matter is that fate will only take us so far, and what we do when we get where we're going is our own choice. I think that history is full of those fated for great things that we will never hear about because they chose to ignore what was presented before them and denied who they could be. Such is the price of choice.

In "Falling for Eve" God realized the moment that He gives Adam and Eve the power of choice, that He can no longer control what they do. Despite this, he intervenes time and time again, testing their choices and putting obstacles in their way or helping them along to try and get what he wants. Time and time again, they surprise him. In one amazingly poignant moment, God sings something to the effect that she (Eve) is too much like God. The ability to make pure choice was something that once given, not even God could control, and only interference in the natural world could He effect His children and their choices.

So given our ability to make these choices, it draws us back again to how this might change if we saw the result of our choices. If you saw your 39-year-old self as a belligerent drunk, would you avoid becoming that? What if, you saw that by the time you were 65, your life would be completely turned around, and that you would have overcome incredible obstacles but end up wealthy and successful? One might assume that you would try to avoid being a drunk and still end up with success, but really, if you go against the first, you couldn't really ensure the latter. What if your experiences as a drunk allowed your future success? It is nearly impossible to tell what cause has what effect, even with hindsight. Would you take the risk of losing it all?

Another interesting thought that develops as one watches "Billy Redden" is how much of his life is the result of this knowledge. It is clear that each "version" of Billy has experienced this same night every 13 years. Given the conversations they have, is it those moments that truly shape his life? Would your life be different if you could talk to your future selves?

Speaking of talking to your future selves, one other interesting thing to ponder is what would you ask? At one point young Billy asks about his parents' deaths. His older selves refuse to answer. The reason? "Waiting is hell." This simple statement says an awful lot. On one hand, if you knew your parents would die at X time, you could live life with them to make it as meaningful as possible, in a way that you might not otherwise. On the other hand could you imagine how you would feel as that date got closer and closer? In some ways we can relate both positively and negatively. How do you feel as you approach an upcoming vacation? With excitement and happiness, mostly. The very thought of what is coming up allows us as humans to create those emotions without the event having happened yet. If we can see something awful coming on the horizon, we equally have the ability to create the sadness and despair long before the event has actually transpired. How much quality could their be in your life and your relationship with those people if you were already seeing their loss in your mind?

The final thing that both these plays bring to mind powerfully is: What would you change if you could?

In "Falling for Eve," Eve is given the option to return permanently to the Garden, and live forever as though she had never stolen the apple. A reset if you will. Would you make it never happen if you could? In "Billy Redden" all the versions of himself are faced with what would they do differently to help themselves, their closest friend, or the one they love. What if you knew that changing your life living for 40 years of sadness and loneliness would allow to to save the one you love? Would you go through with it? What if you knew that saving the life of your friend would lead you to pain, misery and possibly death? Would you still chose to save her?

We often look back at our lives as we look towards our future. Sometimes we say that we would change this that or the other. Knowing where we are in our lives now, sometimes we have to wonder if the bad decisions we made in our past are what led to a great future. Living with regret for the past can belittle the value of human error. We are incredibly powerful creatures, who often take the worst moments and make something incredible out of them. The greatest mistakes we have made my give us the knowledge that makes our lives truly amazing, or even open our eyes to a world we never would have seen without that mistake. I think that a life full of mistakes is a life that is fully lived. To remove our mistakes, no matter how great it seems, would probably destroy our future. It would rob us of our greatest selves, and the person that we can be. Make the mistakes, except the consequences, and your life may just end up exactly how you want it. Just ask Eve.

Precursor to Marriage

I may just be the best thing to happen to gay marriage since Ellen. While this would normally be an exciting accolade for an activist such as myself, I am bestowed this honor, not for my work politically, but my effect on those I date.

I recently bumped into someone I was dating, and who I always saw great potential in. The big news? He's getting married... to the guy after me. While this I am sure has happened to a great many of us, I have a nearly flawless track record in this arena. The only person whom I have dated that didn't end up in either a marriage or some really close proximity thereof, was the one who hates marriage with all the fiery passion of his soul.

A few prime examples:

• First boyfriend ever: Been with his current guy for almost 9 years. Live together. Basically married.
• Longest relationship ever: Been with the guy after me for 5 years. Live together. Do major events together. 
• Only guy I ever asked to live with me: Was married for several years, though now getting a divorce.
• Guy I fell stupidly head over heels for and was the only one besides Jason I could see with forever: Married and owns a joint business.

There are more. It seems even a brief inclination of dating can often lead to some sort of long term commitment or matrimony for the guy that follows after. Why is that? Strangely enough, some of these guys were insistent that they never wanted something that permanent, only to go on and have it fall right into their next relationship.

One of my friends actually used to joke with me about this, though he was semi serious, and has a point. It is so clear what I want in my life and the life I envision for me and who will ultimately be my partner in life. Seeing that I live this so fully and openly in my life, it is near impossible for people to even be friends with me without glimpsing it. It is possible that having seen such a possibility, that they then go and seek it when they move on. This idea is kinda of warm feeling, though if they get such a great image of it, it would be nice for them to... I don't know... imagine ME in it.

Someone else I asked about this said that I am sort of a trial by fire for people. When someone is done with me, they are rarely the same. Sort of in a "Wicked"esque "Changed for good" thing, they aren't changing for me or for the relationship, but no matter what happens, they are changed for good, and the next person to come along sees that and embraces it wholly. Another fairly nice thought.

Of course it is entirely possible that after me, ANYONE less intense has got to feel like Heaven. Oyi. Lastly I suppose that it could be coincidence, but given how little I see that happening, I am sure that there is some cosmic or psychological links that I can continue to ponder. Either way, there's my vent and pondering. Hopefully this time I am with someone who's already ready for their guy, and that guy can be ME!

Up in the Air with the thoughts on Up in the Air

Last night I watched the movie Up in the Air and it definitely makes you think. Life, love, freedom, expectations, and delusions all come into play fairly intricately and gives a great basis for conversation. I am not sure it is really possibile to wax philosophically about this movie without spoilers, so if you don't want to know what happens, don't keep reading. You've been warned.

At first glance, you might think that the movie is a standard romantic comedy, where the main character, Ryan, played by George Clooney, is the classic loner who realizes the error of his ways when he meets a girl and lives happily ever after. The writers have something else entirely in store for us, and the movie leaves us forced to draw our own conclusions about what happens, and what is truly the way people are. Portrayed in the movie are characters with three very different viewpoints. Each one offers a flawed insight into humanity. They each have their strong beliefs, and in the end the movie proves that in a sense, they are all wrong- or at least that their particular road isn't perfect.

First lets look at the most naive: Natalie, played by Anna Kendrick. Natalie is the sweet innocent girl who has followed her love to Omaha Nebraska rather than taking her high quality job offer in San Francisco. Her confrontations with Ryan are constantly arising intense emotions in her. She believes in love and family above all else. Ryan's loner lifestyle she simply cannot fathom. Rather than take the traditional route and make her the heroine in the story, she is shattered, as her boyfriend breaks up with her via text message, and she constantly struggles to define the reason she wants the things that she wants. During one exasperating tirade, she shows that she has fallen into the trap of seeing exactly what she wants in her future. She knows what the guy will look and act like. Her struggles show that even though she claims to believe in love and companionship, her clinging to this image has led her to pick a guy she truly cannot love, and of course probably keeps her from finding someone who can truly be the man of her dreams. The intrinsic lesson she brings is that your expectations can be your entire downfall, and keep you from actually getting what you want.

The second woman in the story, Alex (Vera Farmiga), is a strong experienced woman who seems to know exactly what she wants out of life, and the experience to know how to get it. It is she who best sums up Natalie's shortcomings, and offers the most wisdom throughout the entire movie. When you see her, she is fun loving and care free, but also seems to have her eye on a deeper connection and a greater prize. You are given the impression that she is the balance that the other characters are supposed to find by the end of the movie. Unfortunately for this ideal, the movie throws in a monkey wrench. When Ryan finally breaks down and decides that he should put forth the effort and actually make a human attachment with Alex, he stumbles upon the fact that she has a family already. As she explains in the aftermath, Ryan is a distraction from her life to give her a break from reality. She DID want the real connection and the family. In fact, she already had it. You can draw your own conclusions, but it seems that if she is indeed the model, the writers may even be advocating that family is key, but you need to find your other outlets. For everyone this won't be as extreme of having traveling affairs, but perhaps a subtler message of seeking strength from both your family and outside can be seen here.

Finally of course is the center stage Ryan. Ryan has no connection to his family, his home, or any one person in his life. He lives more on a plane than anywhere else in the world, and though he is surrounded by people, he is of course alone on a deeper level. You find out in fact that he is so far into this life that he has created a philosophy on it that he is actually called to speak about on several occasions. His "What's in your backpack" speeches ask people to look at what is in your life and what weighs you down. He starts with "stuff:" clothes, dishes, photos, belongings, etc. These he emphatically states that were they all to burn up our lives would be better, not worse. "How much lighter our life would be," he implies. He then moves on to people. Friends, family, and of course your love. He sums his thoughts up so well, I can do no better than he:

"Make no mistake your relationships are the heaviest components in your life. All those negotiations and arguments and secrets, the compromises. The slower we move the faster we die. Make no mistake, moving is living. Some animals were meant to carry each other to live symbiotically over a lifetime. Star crossed lovers, monogamous swans. We are not swans. We are sharks."

Not the traditional self help, eh? Of course predictably, he sees hope in Alex and realizes that he doesn't want to be alone. At his biggest speaking engagement ever, he seems to realize that he is feeding people something he no longer believes in. Of course, as mentioned earlier, this change in course doesn't give the happy ending we all expect. Rather than a happily ever after, he sees Alex's true life, and is crushed.

You also see a sub story with Ryan and his family, and several points where he seems to realize how little of a part he plays in their life. There are even a few moments where he gets a chance to rectify some of his inaction in the past, but on the whole, you are left feeling he is still outside.

So what is the take-away from all this? The hopeless romantic is left alone, the sage of the film has an affair, and the reformed character sees no happy ending. And this is how the movie ends. Is the end result that there is no hope? That maybe Ryan is right? This certainly could be taken as truth. I, however, see several small things that give me the impression that were we to do a "10 years later" things might be far more clear. These moments are three-fold.

First, is the steps Ryan takes with the people in his life. Both the note that Ryan writes when Natalie leaves the company, and the miles he gives his sister. He gives the impression of having never written a letter of recommendation before, and his is completely heartfelt. For most people, this would not be a big step, but in the confines of the film I think we can see that this is Ryan's first real connection to someone, even as a friend. It is his attempt to be there for her in the only way he knows how. The same is true for his sister. He sees in her something she truly wants, and does something to try and make it happen, rather than standing back and watching from afar. A major step for this man.

Secondly is the moment where Ryan starts flying to a random destination. The lesson here is actually one that I think applies to both Natalie and Ryan, insofar as they need to start living. Often times people get so wrapped up in what they are doing, that they fail to actually live. Doing things that enrich our hearts, minds and souls is more important than nearly everything else. It is those experiences that make us stronger people, and also what we share with others. If we exclude ourselves from these, we have no way to actually connect with others. We are left with "stuff" that we do. Stuff we do is great to get us from point A to point B, but if you're not living at and between those points, there is really no point. Traveling for pleasure, reading, seeing a film or theatre, enjoying nature, or countless other things can fill this void, but I think it is one many people have, and don't even realize that they are failing at actually living even though they may be successful in so many other areas of their lives.

Lastly, and most blatantly is the follow-up interviews with the fired employees. (Ryan fires people for a living). When they are looking ahead, each and every one says that is their connection to others; their family, and those they love that make them want to do more. It is those connections that give them the strength they need to take a defeat and turn it into something powerful and amazing for themselves. Over and over the message is given: You can be alone, but you can't live alone. To truly enjoy the good, and to handle the worst life has to throw at us, our loves are mandatory.

Clearly I don't agree with everything put forth in this film, and I was frustrated by such an ambiguous ending, but at the same time I think that the film provokes a great deal of thought. Their use of traditional plots with a strong twist to avoid being cliche certainly added to the depth and interest of making you pause and think about what you were watching.

Some nature inspired views on love

This entry was inspired when I was sent this quote:

"Love is a temporary madness. It erupts like an earthquake and then subsides. And when it subsides you have to make a decision. You have to work out whether your roots have become so entwined together that it is inconceivable that you should ever part. Because this is what love is. Love is not breathlessness, it is not excitement, it is not the promulgation of promises of eternal passion. That is just being "in love" which any of us can convince ourselves we are. Love itself is what is left over when being in love has burned away, and this is both an art and a fortunate accident." --St. Augustine

Sort of brilliant, no?

The interesting distinction that he makes when distinguishing between the feelings of being "in love" and actual love are quite interesting. Particularly when so often you will hear people say "I love you, but I am not in love with you." Apparently, said people would be neither. They have neither felt the incredible fireworks of the volatile eruption, nor do they feel that such an event has left them irrevocably linked to another person.

One main thing that I REALLY like about this statement, is that it portrays love as a violent and powerful force of nature. It is something that we have tried for milllenia to control, and have been truly unable to do so. When it comes into your life it is explosive, causing as much damage as possible before you can actually see the great things beneath it. If we go with St. Augustine's analogy, we are almost "in love" so that we can survive together long enough to actually love someone. Without the "breathless excitement and promises of eternal passion" we might very well be unwilling to get to the point with another person where our lives are truly entangled.

The entanglement he mentions is also particularly vivid. I think that image is something that anyone who has ever been in love can visualize for themselves and those they have truly felt for.

Despite all the powerful images he conjures, I think that in the end, the analogy fails to actually capture the entire truth. I would like to think of something without ignoring the man (or woman) involved in the moment, and all the various things that can happen with love. Looking towards nature, I would like to offer the following observation in its place:

Love is the act of two storms crashing together. The mere proximity to one another changes the makeup of each storm and all that surrounds it. Their meeting can be violent or calm. The collision can cause the storms to dissipate completely, rebound off one another in completely different directions, circle around one another for an indefinite period of time, or in the rarest of occasions, the two can merge, becoming a Perfect Storm, one that is greater than either of the two individual parts ever could have been alone.

I like the image of a storm because it can be long or short, and its strength and duration can be completely unrelated to one another. It can be beneficial to the land or destructive, but will always make an impact. Of course, it is constantly changing. Even those loves that last a lifetime, I believe do so not because they are stagnant, but rather that they change together.

Life Definitions

It has been a long time since my last post, and I just realized this will be #100! Woah. I like to talk. Well in true Rick Raven fashion, no easing in from my long break. Why not tackle the big questions!?

A conversation I have had a few too many times to count happened again today, and it made me think a lot about a much larger question.

The conversation settled around what being gay meant. This friend happens to be one of those “enlightened” gays who insists that being gay is an infinitely small part of who they are and “doesn’t define who [he is].”

Statements like this of course bring up all my standard responses such as what other aspect of your life dictates so much of your time as who you love, etc. My view has always been that the closest thing to your sexuality is probably your religion in relation to your life, but after the conversation was over, I realized that there was a much bigger argument and question to be put forth.

What exactly defines our lives?

My friend, for example says that he defines his own life. This statement is of course obvious. Unless you are a weak willed puppet, this will always be the case. So we define our own lives. But how? What measuring stick do we use? What is ok to allow to define your life?

I would venture to say that many people choose to let religion define their lives. I would say that most of us are defined in large part by our jobs. Is this ok? What about your upbringing? Your education? Are there rules as to what can define your life and what cannot?

To me it all seems pretty ridiculous to say that something can’t define a part of your life. I would say that the only time that some definition to your life is really a bad thing (even if I happen to hate it, Hellllllo Christian Right!) is when that is ALL that you are. When one single aspect of your life is so all encompassing that it doesn’t allow the vast complexities of life to mesh together to create some greater you, that is a problem. For the rest, let what you will define who you are!

Looking inwardly, off the top of my head, I can definitely say that I am definitely defined by being gay, living on the East Coast, specifically NYC, being a hopeless romantic, being a Sagittarius, having experienced an Ivy League college, and being encouraged to read as a child. I am sure that I would think of more given some time.

Now that I think about it, we may have both past and present definitions to our lives. By this I don’t mean things that don’t define who you are anymore, but rather things that are in our past that still shape our lives, and the things that are our present, and our person that continue to shape and define us. When you mesh these together, you make up who you are. I think that we all have things in our past, and aspects of our present that could make us who we are, but we choose for ourselves what will have the biggest impact. And I don’t necessarily mean events. X event will definitely cause Y which may have a huge impact on your life, but you may still not choose to let it define you. For example, being adopted definitely changed the course of my life, but I don’t think it defines me as a person.

In the end, I guess I agree in part with what my friend says. We do choose what defines our lives. We do so by embracing aspects of our lives, memories, people, places, thoughts, and ideas. Some may be huge like your religion, some may be small like who you met on the street. But our choices make this matter or not. I think that the fallacy that so many fall into is thinking that nothing defines who you are, or running away from things that might. To me, who you love is always a HUGE matter to your life. Many other things can fall into this as well. The true enlightenment is not in running away from things that might define your life, but rather embracing those things you want about yourself and learning to discard the rest and letting it fall away, making you the meshing of your own choosing.

Realize

Colbie Caillat recently put out a great song that speaks a lot to what I recently wrote about, though in a much more beautiful and artistic way.

The whole song speaks greatly to two very important themes: How one person can only so much, and how easily you can miss out on something great.

The whole song is saying basically that if the man she is in love with realized the same thing about her, they could have the perfect life together, but if they don’t realize it together it can never happen.
She says “Didn’t I tell you? But I can’t spell it out for you.” Then later, “No it's never the same if you don't feel it too. If you would meet me half way, it could be the same for you.”

One person can do all that they can, but in the end, the other person has to be willing to take that leap too. The video does a great job of showing how even when two people are on the same page, if they don’t share that with each other, they can miss out on each other.

So many things in our lives come and go, but the people are the one thing that can make the most difference, and should be held onto whenever possible. Losing people, seeing them as disposable, or just plain not taking chances with them truly makes it so life has a hard time giving us that ultimate happiness.

I hope that when you are given the chance, that you make sure you “Realize.”

Realize
V1: Take time to realize,
That your warmth is
Crashing down on in.
Take time to realize,
That I am on your side
Didn't I, Didn't I tell you.

But I can't spell it out for you,
No it's never gonna be that simple
No I can’t spell it out for you

C: If you just realize what I just realized,
Then we'd be perfect for each other
and will never find another
Just realized what I just realized
we'd never have to wonder if
we missed out on each other now.

V2: Take time to realize
Oh-oh I'm on your side
didn't I, didn't I tell you.
Take time to realize
This all can pass you by
Didn't I tell you

But I can't spell it out for you,
no it's never gonna be that simple
no I can't spell it out for you.

C: If you just realized what I just realized
then we'd be perfect for each other
then we'd never find another
Just realized what I just realized
we'd never have to wonder if
we missed out on each other now.

V3: It's not always the same
no it's never the same
if you don't feel it too.
If you meet me half way
If you would meet me half way.
It could be the same for you.

C: If you just realize what I just realized
then we'd be perfect for each other
then we'd never find another
Just realize what I just realized
we'd never have to wonder
Just realize what I just realized

If you just realize what I just realized

OoOoOOo

missed out on each other now
missed out on each other now

Realize, realize
realize, realize

Too many fish in the sea

“There are other fish in the sea.”

According to Random house, this proverb- or something so similar it is practically the same thing- has been around since about 1573. That’s a long history for a phrase that sums up the mindset creating the disastrous state of current relationships.

I have thought about writing about this for a little while, but a couple friends and their “issues” made it even more relevant for me. Saying that there are more people out there is indeed a positive way to help someone get over someone they lost. To help them realize that the death of one relationship does not mean the death of them all. In today’s world, that is doubly true. Between the internet and the ease of travel and moving, we can meet several thousand people in our lifetime. It is a great big world, and we can touch any part of it.

Long ago, when people rarely left their town, let alone moved cross-country, the idea that there were more people was true, but didn’t mean the same thing. The thought of knowing a hundred people used to seem daunting, even a couple decades ago, where now, the average friend list on Facebook is well over this mark. Factor in that we change careers and hobbies more quickly and more often than ever before, and the number of people that we touch is well beyond what anyone previously could have imagined.

So what’s the dark side to all these added social connections? Let’s face it, the more you have of something, the easier it is not to value it. People are no different, and our relationships show it. Very rarely will you meet someone who has held onto a friend since high school in a very meaningful way, despite the fact that it’s so easy to keep in touch. The reason? People have become more disposable.

While friendships are a sure sign of what I am talking about, in romantic relationships, the situation is even worse. My friend “Billy” met my friend “James” a while back and they seemed to hit it off really well. It was clear to anyone near by, let alone someone who knew them well, that they definitely had some serious chemistry. Being the mutual friend, they both continued to chat about each other to me, and I was pretty happy that two people I knew and loved might be starting something new. Then “Billy” said to me, “You know, it’s just not a good time for me.”

Doing my best not to scream back at him “WHAT THE HELL DO YOU MEAN?” I simply was reminded how easy it is to let someone go. So the ball was dropped. Chances are, they will never pick it up again. Of course nothing is definite, but knowing them both very well, they definitely had the potential to be a great couple.

Another friend, “Dan” said to me today, “I don’t know what I am going to do in a year, so I am really hesitant to get into a relationship.” Keeping my exasperation in check, I asked if it was worth giving up the potential for something great, for a problem that might never exist. “Dan’s” mumbled responses weren’t very convincing, but did show that clearly, the underlying reason he could think this way is because there is simply no notion that this could be his best chance.

In both these examples, and countless others I can name, one or both of the people involved are willing to give up people because “it isn’t the right time” or “they are worried about the future” or “they just aren’t ready for a relationship.” Ridiculous. Now I am all about leaving someone if they aren’t good for you, or you don’t see the relationship being worth something. Baring either of these things, however, people need to learn that what we have is valuable.

Relationships are work, but they pay off. The person in your life right now certainly won’t be your last chance for happiness, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t the best chance. Watching the rate of divorce go up and up and up, the number of people that can be classified as serial monogamists also on the rise, all stem from the idea that what I have is disposable because there is “another fish in the sea.”

The truth of the matter is that each person that walks into your life has the potential to be the best thing for you, but it is always work. No is ever as ready OR as unprepared to be in a relationship as they think they are. No one ever has the perfect moment in their life where now you can fit someone in. Our lives are meant to be malleable. You can control what you do with your life, but not the people in them. Given that who we meet is beyond our control, but what we do with them is completely ours to seize onto, it doesn’t make sense that we would give up the only power that we have to winds of fate, hoping that something better comes along rather than looking at the person standing right there, and seeing what is the most that person can be. Maybe they aren’t your Mr. or Ms. Right. Maybe they are. Either way, I guarantee that putting the most effort you can into that person will give you the best relationship possible with them. It may be that you turn out not to be meant for each other, but end up the best of friends (thank you, Chris Hahn!). Or maybe you just end up growing and learning about yourself. Or maybe, just maybe, you realize that the person you could have so easily let go of, is actually the person that is perfect for you. There may indeed be other fish in the sea, but I assure you, not all fish are created equal.

The Death of Courtship

I came across an article today about “courting.” The main focus of the article was the evolution if you will, of this complicated phenomenon. As with most things with a long history, there has been a lot of change to courting over the years- especially recently. In fact, when looking at the changes, the article eludes to, and I believe that we have all but lost the art of and even desire to court someone.

Even under the best circumstances, we live in a culture where you go on a couple “dates” and from that either end up with nothing, or a relationship. If the timing isn’t right, or something goes wrong and the relationship falters, the only way you really have to pick it back up again is to simply jump into the relationship again.

What exactly happened to make this change? Why is it that I am so surprised when someone actually asks someone out on a real date? How did this become such an exception to the way we live? While in most ways, the women’s movement and the sexual revolution have done great things for our society, it may be that in other aspects, we have lost some valuable things.

Though I myself have certainly followed this, it does seem incredibly limiting. I can’t think of a person I wasn’t dating that it felt ok to get romantic style gifts for. You don’t get flowers for someone your interested in, you get them for someone your with. This leaves you with little more than a first impression with which to actually begin dating, and doesn’t actually show whether or not you are actually looking to put effort towards that or not.

If you were to meet someone, and instead of immediately asking you out, they pulled the old fashioned card and tried to woo you, you are if nothing else guaranteed that you are someone they consider worth working for. That is a huge thing that we so often lack.

Throwing in the fact that so many dates are merely preludes to get sex from someone, the lines become even more blurred. Does interest lie only physically, or in actual courting, which was of course designed as a step towards a lasting relationship? Mix this with our societal ineptitude at communicating with one another, and you end up with a lot of failed relationships, or potential relationships that this never get off the ground.

With struggling relationships, the lack of courting can also be a hindrance. Especially in the global community that we live in, where people can move across the country or the globe with very little effort, relationships can become strained by time, distance, or circumstance. People being at different phases of their life face the same problems. Were a person willing to try and move towards a possible future, without tying up their present, there are very few options in these circumstances.

Imagine for a second that someone you are really interested in moves away. You want to see where this can go, but dating is really out, and the distance may be too much for a relationship. You really only have the options of being friends. In our society, there isn’t much in the way of a middle ground. If we were still in the mindset of courting someone, you could totally feel ok to send them gifts, letters, etc. that express your interest without negative repercussions. The way we currently view things, you really only do this with someone you are with. The person on the receiving end would find it near impossible to view these tokens as flattering, but non-binding. Our society has come to the point where we can have sex without commitment, but the idea that you can express real interest in someone comes only with the pressure of being together.

As mentioned, struggling relationships could benefit from the same thing if there was say, two people with similar ultimate desires, but dissimilar needs at the moment. The one with willingness and desire to commit, could continue to woo the other person as they moved through their life. Showing their interest, and keeping their “hand in the game” while still allowing the other person to live their life unencumbered. You can’t do this while being “just friends” because you lose all the romanticism, and you can’t do this while trying to date, because the one who isn’t ready isn’t given the space they need to grow.

In some ways we seem to have so much relationship freedom, but in that we seem to have created rigid guidelines for ourselves and the way we react to one another that though unspoken, may be even more binding in some ways than the understood traditions of old.

The Need for Heart Stopping Traits

In another tangent on my long-standing philosophizing about love, I have pondered yet another question. Do you need a "heart-stopper" attribute to the person you are with?

This in part came from a book I was reading where the main character would describe in detail the things that "flat did it for her" about those people she was with (no, not a "dirty" book, just happens to be honest about her sex and relationships). This is quite distinctly a different question from general attraction. Wherever you fall on how much attraction you need or not, whether basing things on looks makes you shallow or not, are definitely separate from what I am pondering here.

I figured a good place to start in my exploration would be one of my friends that had long-standing relationships. I asked him if his partner had anything about him that after all this time could make his heart skip a beat; something that he found so uniquely attractive about him that it was beyond thought. For him, it was easy: his partner's smile. He said that no matter what happened, "his 12 year old smile will always make me crumble." And not in the way that a putty face or something that just makes you give up. No, he was talking about a deep attraction about this thing held by this one person.

I imagine that there are people who are so flat attractive that they have numerous things that their partners can find, but I think that everyone has their little things. I think that one of the things that makes people attracted to one another are these things, whether small or large. To me it almost seems like it is something that has to be there. Something that goes beyond, "Yes, I am attracted to them." Something that hits you deeper, and in other words is simply heart-stopping. Some people probably look for different things. Striking eyes? Texture of skin? Anything seems to be possible if it works for you. Though I am betting there will be some disagreement, necessary? I think so.

Asked for Advice

In brief, my birthday was less than I hoped for, but I made some new friends, and am going to have a real party when I get to K.C.

In other, and more interesting news, I have applied to be an advice panelist for Out, Inc. It is just a little side thing, but I think as much as I love writing and being opinionated, it will be an enjoyable thing for me. Ihad three question I was given to respond to. I thought it might be interesting to see them and there responses, so I decided to post them. The letters are numbered with my response following.

1. I've been seeing a guy off and on for about six months and I've noticed a disturbing pattern happening. I'm extremely attracted to him and we spend a lot of time at each other's apartments. But I have noticed that he's not the cleanest person on earth -- in fact, his apartment is downright filthy. When we started dating, he kept his place clean, but now that it's been six months, he doesn't seem to be putting any effort into cleaning before I come over. I've made jokes about it and he's "come clean" to me that he's always been sort of a slob. He's said he'd work on it, but he doesn't seem to be making any effort. Now it's at the point where his dirty habits are starting to affect how I feel about him -- but see, I really like everything else about him. How should I proceed? Do I lay down the law? Or should I just try to suck it up? Remember, this is someone I have deep feelings for. Help!

Mr. Clean-

Cleanliness can be a brutal relationship killer without anyone realizing it. Props to you for addressing it now. I guarantee laying down the law is the single worst thing that you can do. If his mom couldn't control this, chances are you can't either. Trying to force a 180 causes anger and makes you remind the man you're sleeping with of his mother.

Chances are his messiness is centered around things he doesn't like to do or doesn't care about. Keeping things clean initially was probably to make you happy, but no one can pretend forever. Try not to fault him, but let him know it matters to you and maybe he will care a little more.

For things you simply can't deal with, encouraging him to make subtle changes may be the ticket. Speaking as a master of disorganization myself, changing a few small habits, or locations of key things (hampers, etc.) makes a big difference, especially when it's easier to stay neat than not. Small things are really what make big changes, and if you are helping him make progress instead of scolding him, he will respond better and give you more of the results you want.

2. I've been single for a while now, mostly because I'm choosy. However, one of my friends introduced me to a friend of his, and we really hit it off. He's everything I want -- smart, funny, charming -- and it's also the most amazing sex I've ever had. The bad news is this: As I continue to get to know him, it's become clear to me that he has slept with just about everybody I know. Look, I don't want to pass judgment on that, but I have to be honest ¿ there's a part of me that feels like he's a total slut. The good news is he says he's really into me, has acknowledged his "past," and says he wants to be monogamous with me. I really want to get behind that and trust him, but am wondering how I am going to get past this, you know? What if we're at a party and I realize that he's slept with half the people there?

Choosy-

Smart, funny, charming, and after everyone he's slept with he chooses you? Sounds like a big shot of confidence. Seriously, you can't always fault people for their past without cutting a lot of amazing people out of your life. And as a gay man, do you really think you're going to find someone good looking that hasn't had some measure of a "slut phase"? Most of us go through it and go on to have great lasting relationships. I would say that since he has been upfront with you, that's a good thing and you should trust him until he gives you reason not to. Think of it this way, he's been around the block, which means he knows what he's looking for. That kind of stability is hard to find.

If you can get over the trust issue but are still nervous, try this: Any time you find yourself facing someone at a party he slept with, remind yourself that you are the one that has your guy now. You're the one he's going home with tonight, and you're the one he wants. No better recipe for getting over something than a big old fashioned shot of ego.

3. I met someone recently and the attraction was immediate. Trust me -- on our first few dates, we couldn't even look at each other without feeling this urgent attraction. He's amazing, and we also have everything in common -- we just look at each other googley-eyed all the time. We've messed around a few times already and it's so passionate. But here's the problem: We're both tops. And I don't mean versatile tops, I mean we're both 100 percent top-tops. We've talked about this, but the issue does seem to have put up some sort of barrier between us. See, for now, it's fine and it's not a big deal. But if this relationship actually goes somewhere -- which I think it might -- this could become a really big deal. Do I end this now, or do I stick with it and try to work it out. And how the heck do I work this out?

Totally Top-

Your problem is certainly one that a lot of us have dealt with. Without defined roles, it is no surprise that you're going to find someone that doesn't take the role you're used to your partner taking. The good thing is that most gay men don't have to have anal sex to have an amazing sex life. Though the percentages vary, studies show that many guys don't like that kind of action, or simply don't prefer it, even with their long-term partners. The question you have to ask yourselves is can you be one of these couples?

It sounds like you both have a lot of fun together without topping one another. It doesn't sound like either of you are the type of guys who can only get off with anal sex. With such a great range of activities you can engage in together, you only have to ask if that's going to be enough. For a lot of guys it certainly can be. So long as you can continue pleasing each other, keep on trucking, and don't let yourselves get hung up on something that only is an issue in the hypothetical.

Too much like a conservative straight woman?

Well, the fact that I am sitting here writing this at Starbucks means that the jury is still out on the success of my birthday. Undoubtedly tomorrow will bring some sort of posting on the good or ills of my day.

I find myself at a point of reevaluating some of my long held beliefs. It started slowly, as I was time and time again confronted with friends that worked outside what I thought were the ideal ways to handle a relationship, but ended with a bang. I have been reading Dan Savage's new book, The Commitment. Like his previous The Kid, it is sort of a personal memoir about something he and his partner have experienced and how they dealt with it. When I read The Kid I was made aware of various problems in parenting, both in general and specifically as a gay man and had some very thought provoking moments as I read it. The same has held true with his most recent book.

There are lots of things that I am bound to think about, and I am sure that at some point I will get around to many of the other points in later writing, but right now, I have only one focus: monogamy, and lasting relationships.

I have always held the idea that a real relationship is one where monogamy is mandatory. No questions. When I dated Daniel, I was challenged to a degree in this belief, but in all of our time together, we really never had to confront it head on, so I pretty much was able to continue to float along with my opinion. Since that time, I have if anything strengthened this position, asserting that the only way to have a truly lasting and healthy relationship was to be 100% committed to each other and no one else.

Now a few friends who have known me well pointed out the fact that no matter what my opinion was in theory, and no matter how much I might not cheat, they were absolutely positive that my boyfriend cheating on me would not be a deal breaker. I am too forgiving and would rather have the relationship succeed than one night of weakness to destroy all we had built. They are probably right, but as of yet, I haven't had to test this hypothesis.

As I mentioned, several friends in long-term relationships that don't necessarily believe in monogamy have recently come into sharp conflict with my opinions. Some are to the point where I would simply get angry, feeling they were betraying themselves and whoever they were with. The angrier I got, the more I had to wonder if this wasn't a case of me using anger to hide the fact that in light of their success I was losing logical ground. I hate losing logical ground, and if I was indeed overcompensating with anger, this was a bad sign indeed.

Dan was the catalyst that ensured that I really had to come to grips with my real opinion on this. About halfway through the book, Dan has a chapter that he devotes entirely to sex with other people while you are dating someone. True to his consistently reasoned approach, he points out many different angles and uses several examples. Cutting as short as possible, he cites the Greeks, Romans, and Jonathan Katz, who says that monogamy is "one of the pillars of heterosexual marriage and perhaps its key source of trauma." In ancient times, the value of marriage was placed over that of monogamy, and in fact it was accepted that being with one person for the rest of your life, had everything to do with life commitment and little to with who you slept with. The evidence that people weren't designed to be monogamous and that any attempts to break our nature is pretty pointless. It's funny because in this instance, I feel like all the religious people that I despise trying to say that only in denying ourselves can we be "good." No better way to win me over than make me feel like I am acting like someone I hate.

Denying or trying to hide the fact that we are attracted to others is ridiculous. As Dan says, "It's impossible for two people to be all things to each other sexually, and the expectation that two people must be all things to each other- that they should never find another person attractive or act on that attraction-does a great deal of harm." Now Dan certainly isn't making a case for polygamy, permanent singlehood or stupidity. In fact, his case is presented in the only way that I ever would have been forced to reconsider myself: the fact that his case is for saving marriage.

As I mentioned, the ancients didn't have the same hang-ups we do. In fact, only in the last century or so has the idea of complete monogamy become so socially adamant. Strangely, Dan also points out the fact that the steady increase in divorce rates mysteriously starts at the same time. Coincidence? No such thing. So how is it that being with other people can save your relationship? Well, he conveniently gives 2 great examples. In both these examples (one gay, one straight) it is strong couples who are totally devoted to each other, but have set up the "rules" to which they can expand their sexual experiences without damaging their relationships.

1. Terry- (The rules here are less specific) They must be safe, not in any way endanger their child. They don't hang out in bars or do internet hookups, but if the right circumstances are met, "cheating" is allowed. The two examples he gives are three ways (obviously much more applicable in gay relationships) but implies that in the ten years they have been together there have been a few other circumstances outside of three ways.
2. Billy- "Should the opportunity arise or present itself in such a way that it can be taken advantage of discreetly, without doing emotional harm to the other person or endangering the other person, than either of us can take advantage of the opportunity." He goes on to gives 2 examples. One at a restaurant, where a woman outside was incredibly hot. Billy kept turning to look at her, and instead of getting enrages, his girlfriend teased him, telling him he was busted, and switched seats with him so he can have a better view. They "spare each other the trauma of pretending." Interesting. The more extreme example of this rule is with this woman at the bowling alley. He says, "If… I was out with some friends and Kelly was out of town or having a girl's night out, and Red over there and I hit if off and things proceeded as thing sometimes proceed, I could take advantage of the situation without guilt."

Both guys point out that they have these rules, and by allowing the freedom, neither couples have acted on it very often, but neither do they have to worry about the snide comments of "you were looking at so and so" or the heartbreaking revelation of cheating. In both these instances of course things like affairs would be deal breakers, and the ideas behind the rules is that they are there to strengthen the relationship not destroy it. Dan says that they've made their "desire for others a non-issue." He goes on to say that, "Indeed, as most heterosexual swingers report, the times we've had sex with other guys has actually enhanced our desire for each other. Far from tearing us apart, the times we've had sex with another person… have renewed and refreshed our intimate life. It's made our home more stable, not less."

I am forced to admit that he may be onto something. I know he isn't the first. He brings up so many other examples like the aforementioned swingers, etc. and of course there are all my friends that seem to make it work. Maybe it is society that is forcing us to take this narrow view, and maybe in this one instance I have allowed it to shape my own thinking, possibly to my detriment. Thank God for the ability to reevaluate our opinions and become smarter before we destroy ourselves.

Thoughts from Saying Goodbye

So today was the day that I made my "official" move to New York. Having been gone most of the last two weeks getting things settled, this weekend was really the time where I was able to tell my friends and family what was going on, and try and spend time with them before I left. In some ways, I don't feel like the move is that dramatic, seeing as I am keeping my place in Kansas City, am "moving" with the clothes and electronics that fit in some suitcases, and will be back in three weeks for Thanksgiving.

I was a little surprised at how little I felt like I needed when I moved. Granted, some things, like my books or DVDs I wouldn't get rid of, but so much stuff simply didn't seem necessary. Maybe I should look at my possessions like that more often and see how much I keep. But on with the philosophizing.

Since this all worked out so suddenly, there wasn't a lot of time to prepare, or to tell anyone what was going on. When the possibility that this would happen came up, I didn't really want to spread the word that I might be moving. Much better in my mind to wait until I had some things solidified. The bad part of this plan, is that the people I know pretty much got a week's notice I was leaving, and of that time, I was only free for a few days to see them.

A few things were exasperating. First was the calls I got from people insisting that I visit them. Granted, some of these people are ones that I would have given a great deal to see, but seriously when you have 48 hours to fit everyone in, driving for hours on end doesn't really fit well into the equation. I was hoping that some people would have tried harder to make it work. Lastly, and perhaps the most interesting thing that I noticed was the guys.

Since I have started dating, there have been a few guys that really made an impact on me, but never actually went anywhere. The reasons range everywhere to prior commitments, to distance, poor timing, whatever. The point is that at some point no matter how much you like someone or care about them, when it isn't working out, you have to move on. Since my "announcement" some of these guys, in fact a large portion of this category, have called me and talked to me all bewildered. One of them even said to me, "I just always took for granted that you would be there." Like I was the guy that when they finally figured out what was going on would be sitting there waiting for them. While the reactions were varied, from wanting to sleep with me before I left, to avoidance to outright depression, the thing that seemed to ring so true to me is that this was a bit ridiculous. I mean there are two or three of these guys that at one point in my life would have given up a great deal to be with. I am fairly certain this was apparent. To see this backlash, calls from one in I haven't even talked to in months, strange conversations, all kind of threw me.

I am not sure what it was that made them feel this way, but I have to say it is probably close to the same with all of them. Perhaps it is something as simple as me seeming to be dependable, giving them the idea that they could always rely on me to be there, or maybe I make myself too available. I mean when you wear your heart on your sleeve, I know that I give up a great deal of control. Perhaps this is even more than I had imagined. Somehow I am making it to that the depth of my feelings gives the illusion that I am there at their pleasure. I am pretty sure I need to make sure that in the future, I make sure people know that no matter how much I care about them, I have to take care of me.

But on with the happier aspects. Halloween was a great night, but I focused as little as possible on what was coming up and just had a good time with my friends particularly Justin who was an awesome friend to "date" for the evening.

I really started out with a going away party at Bar Natasha, of course. I invited nearly everyone that I knew in the city, which is a hard thing to do when you know so many people and have very little notice, but still, I figured it was important enough that people would attend. I was surprised three times with that party. First, most of my family came. That was impressive. Secondly, there were very few people by comparison to what I expected. Finally, perhaps the most surprising was the quality of time I had with the people that were there. I realized that most of my closest friends had worked it out, and seeing them together and having a good time when really the only thing they had in common was me, is really a great thing. There was a particular appearance that really made my night, and I think that a lot of things that have been floating around in my life were kind of brought to a better place. Of course it came as no surprise that only half the people were there at any one time, and that some of my friends came at the last minute and decided to drag me all around for the rest of the night.

The next night was something I was marginally dreading. I had our HRC Comedy Night, and though I was excited about the event, I was not looking forward to explaining to everyone that I was leaving. Given my leadership position in the organization, it is going to be an interesting transition, especially when there is no time to really plan. The overwhelming response, however, made me feel as though my fear was a bit ridiculous. Every single person I talked to was very excited for me and thought that what IW as doing was great. There was no concern for how we would work things out, or anything of the sort. Only my friends supporting me in something that was great for me.

The rest of the weekend was up and down. Some things were harder than others. Rae made people cry when she sang Ordinary Boy for me at Bar Natasha, Cody's reactions have been surprisingly mature and heartfelt, and a few of my friends surprised me with what they thought. I will miss people a lot.

I am completely happy with my decision, and have no regrets. In fact I think that the people I am going to miss actually make it feel more worthwhile to leave a place. I am at the perfect time in my life to make this change, and it is something that has been a long time coming. I am not going to look back, but it is nice to know that I have left a footprint behind me.

Goodbye before Hello

Having spent a great deal of my life traveling all around the country, one thing seems to be fairly consistent no matter the area that I am in: No one wants to meet anyone, at least not socially. Every day we are constantly surrounded by people we don't know, and somehow we keep it that way. Some people tell me that Europeans don't share this problem, but I haven't spent enough time internationally to test this theory. For the USA though, I know it is true.

Don't get me wrong. I know that you can't possibly "meet" everyone that you come into contact with. For one, no one has time for all that, and more importantly perhaps, your brain would explode. As far as the social envelope goes, I seem to push it as far as I can. I meet people all over the place, and even when I am not spending much time with a person, I allow a certain amount of intimacy. By that I mean striking up a 20 second conversation with the cashier at Starbucks, or the person waiting in line beside me. I try and meet new people when I go out, and especially anyone who is a friend of a friend. My thought is "If they like you, there's probably something I can like as well."

The fact of the matter is that I know that I am very odd in this. For one, a lot of people seem confused when I talk to them randomly. Furthermore, watching other people shows me that most people don't really do this all that much. People seem to have built walls around themselves, and I am not really sure why. I understand that some people don't really have a wall, sometimes they just don't feel like expending the energy, but really, often times, what else are you going to do? Take for instance my recent trip to Omaha. I was there with one of my best friends as he tried out for American Idol. Shortly after we arrived, I was conversing with the front desk people, finding out what they liked to do around town, both for my own information, and just to enjoy their company. I know that this is something that doesn't happen very often to them, because for the next 4 days that we were there, they were overly nice to me, and always seemed excited when I came around. The reason? People thrive on human contact. Even the most solid introverts need and on some level crave a certain level of human interaction. Short, curt, wall-encased phrases to get what you need and leave while "technically" an interaction, don't really satiate this need at all. Many people might argue that people in the service industry get too much contact, but truth be told, the often get less than anyone else. Because they are so busy interacting with their customers, they have less opportunity to interact with their co-workers in any meaningful way, and few people seem willing to let down any of their walls with "the help."

I find this to be ridiculous. Now of course there is only so much that you can do and say when you are being waited on by someone, or checking out, but truth be told, even within the limited time constraints that exist, you can make a very quick, short connection. Some of the best memories I have of people are definitely what Fight Club names as "Single Serving Friends." There is certainly nothing wrong with this, and I guarantee that both the customer and the person delivering the service have a better day when some of those barriers don't exist.

Another great example from the trip was the audition itself. For those of you who have never been, they put thousands (no that is not an exaggeration at all) of people into a huge auditorium, many of them sitting around for more than 8 hours until all is said and done. I had so much fun. Being around so many different people, many of them from the far reaches of the country, all with completely different backgrounds, all there for different reasons, despite the single goal of the audition. The thing was though, it was still hard to meet people. Talk to someone and they look at you askance, as if to ask "What manner of creature are you that you actually want to meet people?" Not counting the guys we met while stuck in line, it was like pulling teeth to actually talk to someone. The only meaningful conversation happened to end up being someone I met at the audition for 5 seconds and then bumped into later that night while just hanging out. You would think that with all those people all with nothing else to do, I would have met almost too many people rather than almost none. It really exasperates me.

When you throw yourself into a "social" scene, rather than get better, things actually get worse. Walk into a bar, and no matter what you instantly pile on a hundred qualifiers. The most important being, "Are they hitting on me?" Because of this we instantly have a hundred different pre conceived notions of who and what we want to talk to. Sexuality doesn't matter in the least. Straight bars, gay bars, whatever. No matter who you come into contact with, the thought is the same, and the only way you are really able to break through the barrier is to be exactly what they want at the moment. Going out by yourself is considered a bad thing to do, and frankly, it often isn't any fun. People travel in packs, not juts to enjoy themselves with their friends, but to insulate themselves from actually admitting anyone new. The few lone wolves are normally looking to "meet someone" in the sense of romantically, and with that much pressure, you fall back immediately into the myriad of qualifiers.

Why is it that someone can't go out, and it be thought normal for them to strike up a conversation with random strangers? Why is it that when we are out somewhere, you don't imagine that we can make new friends. No matter where you are, the people around you have at least one thing in common with you: they are doing whatever you are. Standing in line at Starbucks? Chances are you both like coffee. Sitting in a theatre? At least a modicum of similar movie taste. At a bar? If nothing else you are experiencing (for good or ill) the same scene. Given even these simple similarities it seems to be that you should be able to always strike up a conversation. If those simple superficial things happen not to take you any further, so be it. What have you lost? I think that the chance to meet and experience something new always brings its own rewards, and the fact that you could meet someone really amazing is an added bonus. Why oh why then, can't we just be ok when someone says, "Hello?"

Dallas, cuisine, country, & love

I am a bit behind in writing this to be sure, but the thoughts are still there, so I figured I better get down to it.

Last week I went to Dallas to visit a friend of mine, and get out of town to clear my head a bit. I don't really think that anything got resolved, frankly thoughts kept revolving around two different aspects of my life that kept me from having the kind of escape that I wanted, but it was still a good time. I am not the kind of guy to fill pages up with a series of events, but a few interesting things did happen that I should note (all this is of course excepting the concert which I already talked about, but which was indeed the highlight of the trip).

Just to lay it out there, I am not sure if I picked the bad time to visit, or what, but Dallas was CRAZY! Some of the worst storms they have seen in a long time, hours of traffic in directions people swear there shouldn't be any, oh yes, and to top it all off, Dallas caught on fire before I left. I call that timing. Ok. On to the actual experiences!

I went to this restaurant called Texas de Brazil, and it was AMAZING! I bring this up only to comment on how fantastic it was, as well as put out there that I was able to try some new things, which has become a rarity of late. I don't regularly come across something that is completely new. If you ever have the chance to try one of these restaurants (apparently there are several) I highly recommend it. The buffet alone was incredible, providing a veritable feast including… wait for it… heart of palm, which is indeed the inside of a palm tree. I never even knew that they were edible. Quite tasty indeed. After delighting myself there with everything from salad to lobster bisque, the "real meal" started. There are these little cards that you flip to the green side when you want meat brought to your table, red when you are done. And boy did they bring some great things. There were several types of chicken, beef, ham, lamb, etc. all cooked completely differently and for the most part were quite tasty.

Alright, enough food talk. I found myself making an interesting discovery. I have been down and out a little on real relationships lately, and strangely there was little coming my way even among people I knew to reaffirm my faith in love. Where I found this affirmation turned out to be none other than a country bar. Yep, that's right. Going in there with my friends was interesting, and not because of the music. Though it is not on my playlist constantly, I do mix in some country from time to time, and really enjoyed a lot of the songs they were playing. What set me back was the fact that I felt like one of the only single people at the bar. Normally at a bar, gay or straight, I would say the vast majority of people there are single, either appeasing their boredom or looking to meet people. That's what single people do. The random couples out to hang out with their friends are greatly minimalized by the loners surrounding them. This bar, the ratio was completely reversed.

It took me a while to figure out exactly why that was, but I can think of a few good reasons. The least of such reasons being that there were 3 other bars on the same street that were boasting the cream of the singles crop. Even putting that aside, I realized that country bars actually lend themselves to couples. Unless it's a line dance or someone just being silly on their own, the vast majority of country dances are partnered. There are tons of things that you can do two-stepping, or four-stepping, and really you can dance all night just like that- if you are with someone else. A partner is mandatory. Given the closeness of these dances, strangers or even friends doing them together is somewhat rare, so when the dance floor is full, couples abound. Seeing as I was visiting another state and not looking for anyone for other reasons anyway, I decided just to be social. Talking to so many of the people there, listening to their stories, watching them dance with one another really reminded me that real relationships exist, and they do work.

So many times, we look at the people around us and only hear of the bad things. Who broke up with who, whose heart is broken, etc. We forget to celebrate the successes of those people that stay together for a long time or even forever. I have two friends passing their fourth year together, and no one ever really mentioned their relationship. Only when they started having troubles did the discussions ever come up. Looking on a world scale it is even worse. Think of the "sweetheart couples," the ones that seem to capture everyone's hearts. Think about how much press, thought, and time are given them when they are together. Now think about those that have broken up. It seems like the pinnacle of relationships was magnified within them, but only apparent to us after they have crashed and burned. So many bad relationships, and people bouncing around trying to find what they want and need, and all we hear is the bad.

No wonder people get bitter and jaded. We no longer live in a world where survival depends upon finding a mate. To me it seems that such circumstances would make it so that those who come together are happier, and yet the world would like us to think that it is not so. For me, I was thankfully reminded that while the world can look dark at times, it may only take a trip to the nearest country bar to realize that there is a lot of light too.