Top.Mail.Ru
? ?

May. 19th, 2007

showing pain behind hir back yur back mi back

May 17: i'm crying now as i write this. there is no one else around and i hate my livejournal. so it had to be put somewhere else constructive. talking to so many people about queer families lately, including a lovely conversation with anais today. but it's all so painful. and i'm still crying about what i just read. still can't think about what to do with that pain i've just been exposed to. i want to say fuck you to this whole censorship thing. i really want instead an agenda about this. this pain that makes me just want to scream and vomit forever - but instead tears and unbearable breathing. this painful heat my body responds with.

wow I thought It would all go away as I wrote. Instead it’s getting worse. Realer. It’s so odd, that image. much worse. the chair the inability to sit down in a chair is the image that keeps coming to my mind. what it means for him for me for his father for that violence he has TO FUCKING LIVE WITH EVERYDAY. and why is it we all don’t live with that pain? why are we all dancing away moving away from reality at every moment of our fucking life. i guess it’s because otherwise we couldn’t live bearing with that suffocation.

here’s Mattilda’a letter and the source of all this pain from nobodypasses.blogspot.com

i remember thinking it was so strange he voice recorded his entries. now that most basic part of it has a background that torments me.

I did this event called the Radar Salon recently, a new series hosted and curated by Michelle Tea where two writers (in this case, me and Bucky Sinister) engage in conversation while Michelle asks questions. At one point, Michelle asked how we were both able to be so vulnerable in our work, and I'm not sure exactly what I answered, except that later she asked what we were looking forward to, and I couldn't think about anything except what I was most fearing: deciding whether to visit my father, who I haven't talked to since I confronted him 11 years ago about sexually abusing me -- he's now dying of cancer. I'd just written him a letter, and at the event I said -- in between sobbing -- that I just wished he could say that he sexually abused me, because it would actually make it easier for me to go on living, and he's going to die and what good will it do him to have not acknowledged anything. I usually don't cry like that -- especially not in public -- and it was an incredible moment of public vulnerability where I actually felt supported, both by Michelle and Bucky -- and the audience. It's so important to reveal the violence, the trauma, and the struggles to survive -- and I'm hopeful that it makes me stronger to do so.

So I've decided to visit my father, even though he will almost surely give me nothing that I ask for, and almost everything about the visit will probably be horrible. But I've decided to visit him, because I can't decide to visit him after he dies, so I might as well do it beforehand.

Here is the letter that I wrote to my father:


October 11, 2006

Dear Dad:

It surprised me, after so many years of wanting all traces of you to disappear from my life, but when I first heard that you had cancer, I started fantasizing about ways that I could save you, maybe by offering health advice that you might not seek out-- acupuncture, meditation, guided imagery. Then I started thinking about all of these mundane things -- like talking about publishers with you, the differences between this one high-end lefty publisher with the gorgeous square books and the other one moving into their territory, plus oh the drama of working inside the whole disastrous publishing machine. Most people aren't that interested in publishers, but it seemed like something you might like to hear about. That's when I realized that, even after 11 years of not talking to you, I still held some hope that maybe you would come to terms with sexually abusing me, that you would finally admit it and then perhaps we could have a mundane conversation about publishers.

There is no question that, as a psychiatrist, you have had access to absolutely any possible way to come to terms with sexually abusing me, more resources for dealing with your abuse than almost anyone in a similar situation. Instead, like most parents (and psychiatrists) who sexually abuse their children, you have chosen to deny it. You even contacted a “false memory syndrome” specialist, someone whose job is to assure abusive parents that their children are confused at best, that their memories can be dismissed and discarded, that it's never too late to cover up the violence in order to bolster the status quo.

I know that an abusive family is like a boulder landing on a glass of water -- even if you succeed at lifting the boulder, what is left to drink? When I confronted you, I was certainly aware that you might very well never accept the reality of your abuse, and that I might never again speak to you. Still, I continue to feel angry and disgusted (and yes -- sad and abandoned) by the ways in which you have chosen to maintain a veneer of “respectability” at all costs, including the loss of any relationship with me. I am grateful that you have respected my request not to contact me unless you could say that you raped and molested me, but sometimes it shocks me that you haven't been able to step out from the comfort of denial in order to face the reality of your abusiveness.

Especially now, when you may not live for that much longer.

Sometimes I resent that I have to be the strong one -- even here, against all hopelessness, I’m attempting to facilitate your epiphany that may never come. I am not strong, I am falling apart -- my body is failing me -- you know that. The smallest activities are painful -- chopping vegetables, sitting in the wrong chair, holding the rail on the bus, walking one block too many, carrying a bag. Writing more than a page by hand is enough to make my wrists, arms, shoulders and neck burn, my whole body aching afterwards. Bed is a place where I can sometimes stay, but it fails to nourish me -- many days I'm so exhausted that just leaving the house can be completely overwhelming. I have a strong will, otherwise I would have been dead long ago from the wounds you enacted. I'm strong, but I'm falling apart.

I learned will from surviving you, shutting everything inside even when it pushes back. There are other ways of showing strength. I am still learning them.

Some people, when dealing with a terminal illness, decide to make dramatic changes in their lives. That is what I'm asking from you. I'm not asking whether you love or miss me, whether you feel miserable or guilty. I'm asking you to hold yourself accountable for the pain you have caused me, the pain you continue to cause me, the pain that sometimes I'm worried I won't survive. I'm asking, once again, for you to acknowledge that you raped, sexually abused and molested me. I'm asking you for this because it would make it easier for me to go on living.

On a more mundane level, I would also like for you to ensure that I have enough money to meet my basic needs for the rest of my life. That is something I know you can do, but the most important thing is that you acknowledge that you sexually abused me -- I want to make that clear. I don't think this is a lot to ask.

In any case, I would be dishonest if I didn't say that I would like to see you before you die. Obviously, our conversation would be much richer if you decided to admit that you sexually abused me, but that is your choice.

I haven't yet figured out the parameters of a potential visit, and I will be in touch. Please do not write to me at this point unless it is to acknowledge sexually abusing me.

Love –

mattilda

May. 13th, 2007

Un Tissu S'il Te Plait

I saw the perfect film yesterday. Just what I needed to wake myself up. From this emotionally-dead state, where I don't respond to other's pain and I don't respond to my own. I did it to myself, did I tell you that? Forcing myself to stop crying from my mother's words, I forced myself to stop responding to films and stories others told. It scared me when I started to hear the most traumatic experiences - and my heart would just close in on itself, but my face could say nothing. That Sodium H2O could not be there to respond and trickle down so that my body became a kinesthetic parallel to the emotions being read to me. It was destroying me, to no longer engaging my body in this painful moment of [not compassion but renactment of the other's pain].

So the film that woke me up completely was Ma Vie En Rose. I'd heard of it before and finally got around to renting it this weekend. Why was it perfect? Because the child's desire to neglect her biological "maleness" and dress as female clashed with her family - clashed with normative conditions for love in a way that my mother has endlessly shown me. It was awful. Ludovic was first told softly to conform. That didn't work. Ludovic was taken to therapy. The therapist wasn't a magician - nor transphobic as the parents would have needed. Ludovic was bitterly blamed for the family's turmoil. She told granny she just wanted her parents to love her. Ludovic's beautiful gorgeous silky black hair was cut. She looked nothing short of a holocaust victim . . . it was here I think my tears were most painful. As even the mother cried while the raser choped away at what was so beautiful, so angelic, so deliciously marvelous and yet so quick to leave. I think it was here I started to scream. Watching the last treasure Ludovic had, her last resource to embrace her femininity in spite of the regulation of her parents.

I wish the movie had not ended as well as it is. But that's selfish. My story isn't going to end well, others' might not end well either. But that doesn't mean all mustn't and all won't. Regardless, the film woke me up. Got me to take the first step to wake into life once more. To wake into my own pain, and other's pain. To respond to violence not just with my thoughts but with my heart, body, emotions, screams, terror, fear, disturbance, hate, anguish, disgust, and love. Photography has lately helped me do this, but it was not a replacement for this crying/screaming/hurting experience I gain from films and others' stories. Though, I wish it could happen more often from those I talk to in person. I think I become to concious about my body at those moments though, and that takes away from the possibility to not engage, but become to story someone is telling me. Let that very pain that is being told infiltrate me like I let it happen in films. I guess that's something to work on. As for my own pain, I don't want to focus on my mother, but only because I want to stop taking her hate personally. That's her own issue, not mine to be concerned about. It's her karma to work on, I need to learn to embrace this separation as well as she has - so that when I do hear those bitter hatefl insults I can just think about the beautiful steps for growth and meeting that will come to the both of use (even if we make those steps without so much as looking/hearing from the other. Ever again.)

May. 8th, 2007

So Simply Serendipitous

The ashes and fog that came from the fire was initially disturbing

But then I saw a magnolia.
                    Close enough to the ground this time.
                    I could smell it for the first time.
                    Was better than any perfume imaginable.
But then I chose to walk as I listened to Yann Tiersen.
                   Found the perfect volume.
                   To complement the natural soundtrack.
                   A lady passing in her bicycle contributing to la dispute.
But then I chose to realize how much I terribly wish I lived in France.
                   In Paris where I could choose from one of the many cafes.
                   And visit my family in the banlieue.
                   And go to the Eiffle Tower just to watch the people near the metal.

The ashes and fog that came from the fire was suddenly just what I needed:
to paint my world in shades of gray.

May. 6th, 2007

A Vampire Shared This Poem With Me

A Lullaby for Depressed, Pessimistic Radicals who’ve just been dissed [poem]
Written by Suneel Mubayi
Sunday, 19 September 2004

Just because you win an argument
Doesn’t mean your principles win over my principles
Just because you win an argument
Doesn’t mean you’re right
Doesn’t mean it’s right to be an apologist
During the course of the struggle
There will be arguments, debates,
Exchanges and battles that
We will both win
And lose
You have faith in the sanctity of your religion
Because it shrouds you in a comfortable haze
Of ignorance and blindness
And convinces you of the futility of questioning how things are
I have faith too
In another sanctity
Of the struggle
Of revolution
Of the revolution
Of permanent revolution
My sanctity opens my eyes and ever increases
My awareness and consciousness
My faith in what I know is good
Not because some non-existent deity or verbose book told me so
But because I understood so, analyzed so, and realized so
Keeps me going every time I am outwitted or struck down
It is also my penance
To pay and repent for all the privilege I inherited
And the oppression committed to sustain me
If you wish to insult me in the future
Just tell me I’m bad, or that you think I suck
Rather than calling me weird, perverted or abnormal
I take those as compliments
You say that you’re too cynical, too jaded to struggle
That you’re beyond idealism
Well guess what –
I’m beyond cynicism
And my ideals aren’t fantasies or even pictures of utopia
After years of having internalized and endured my own suffering
I purged all oppression from within me
And saw that my suffering was unique within
So many others’ equally unique struggles
But I will never apologize for my own mistakes
Nor will I apologize for the mistakes of those who wronged me
And a struggle is such that once started,
It can never stop, or rather
It should never stop
I, we, will not stop at each achievement
And rest on our laurels
We will push on further and further
And if you think I’m revolutionary, treasonous and seditious
Then let me tell you that the next generation of radicals
Will call me a conservative



***the emoticon is "horny." i don't know why it thinks horny is the devil. i'm definitely intrigued...

May. 5th, 2007

Conversation with my brother. The end explains why it ended.


Jeremie096 (11:17:51 PM): i mean what is him or her biologically
monochromeVIBE (11:17:54 PM): so i have actually been exchanging emails with hir
Jeremie096 (11:17:58 PM): i don't care about the societal gender label
monochromeVIBE (11:18:03 PM): biologically neither. just like i'm biologically neither
Jeremie096 (11:18:26 PM): biologically you're a female, unelss you grew a penis?
monochromeVIBE (11:18:24 PM): biology is also a social/personal constructed as well jeremie
monochromeVIBE (11:18:33 PM): you perform your genitilia too
Jeremie096 (11:18:50 PM): its a scientific definiton
Jeremie096 (11:18:54 PM): it isn't open to interpretation
monochromeVIBE (11:18:59 PM): science is always open to interpretation
Jeremie096 (11:19:05 PM): society has nothing to dow ith how you function biologically
monochromeVIBE (11:19:08 PM): look at heisenberg's theory of uncertainty
monochromeVIBE (11:19:11 PM): look at kuhn
monochromeVIBE (11:19:14 PM): look at kant and hume
monochromeVIBE (11:19:37 PM): and as for genitilia, consider perhaps the range of sexualities that exist at birth simply when considering the scale of how to measure the phallus.
Jeremie096 (11:19:50 PM): that's not the point
monochromeVIBE (11:19:59 PM): it has a certain arbitrary range for female, arbitrary range for intersex, arbitrary range for male
Jeremie096 (11:20:02 PM): if you have a penis or vagina, you body processes different biologicall functions
Jeremie096 (11:20:06 PM): that is just how it is
monochromeVIBE (11:20:12 PM): right, and that's not necessarily on a scale
monochromeVIBE (11:20:30 PM): and that's not necessarily exclusive from one's own input in one's biology
monochromeVIBE (11:20:48 PM): a body's phsyical manifestation/performance is dependent on how the individual both reads, and behaves with that body
Jeremie096 (11:20:57 PM): the biology is not an interprative thing, you either have a penis, vagina, or both
monochromeVIBE (11:21:01 PM): not necessarily
monochromeVIBE (11:21:08 PM): there is a signficant spectrum
monochromeVIBE (11:21:20 PM): and what one does with that biology will alter one's chemical/hormonal makeup
monochromeVIBE (11:22:09 PM): for instance, i might have a penis, but i choose not to penetrate. that will effect my homones. also, i might choose to take hormones, that will effect my chemistry. or i might choose to penetrate with my pensi, but i'll bind my breasts.
monochromeVIBE (11:22:25 PM): that is inflicting pain to my body, and simultaneously changing how it is being read
Jeremie096 (11:22:33 PM): in the end, u still have a penis don't you?
monochromeVIBE (11:22:32 PM): i am taking an active involvement with my body
Jeremie096 (11:22:38 PM): you still pee out of it
Jeremie096 (11:22:47 PM): using it as a sex funciton and excretory function
Jeremie096 (11:22:49 PM): that is that
Jeremie096 (11:22:53 PM): however you wanna decorate is that
Jeremie096 (11:22:57 PM): but the biology is what it is
monochromeVIBE (11:22:57 PM): i can also pee from female geinitilia
monochromeVIBE (11:23:05 PM): so now peeing from a penis makes you biologically male?
Jeremie096 (11:23:17 PM): yes
Jeremie096 (11:23:21 PM): or hermaphrodite
Jeremie096 (11:23:24 PM): whatever the case might be
monochromeVIBE (11:23:25 PM): that is very subjective jeremie
monochromeVIBE (11:23:39 PM): for so many other people it goes a little beyond something as basica and universal as "peeing"
monochromeVIBE (11:24:02 PM): and that's my point, what makes someone biologically "male" will be denated differently by every individual
Jeremie096 (11:25:21 PM): its not the peeing
Jeremie096 (11:25:25 PM): its the instrument itself
Jeremie096 (11:25:34 PM): if you have a penis, you are biologically male
monochromeVIBE (11:25:35 PM):  
and you have to realize to that the categories defining what makes one biologically male is usually dependent on what is read physically. So a) penis visible? That can be cut off, hidden, or differently connotated by the phallus-bearer. B) facial hair? Can be shaved, can be removed with laser surgery C) Deep voice? Can be altered by the individual with the deep voice. ... and of course all these things are not essential to any indidivual. women might have a large clit, women might have a penis, women might have facial hair, women might have deep voices
Jeremie096 (11:25:39 PM): you can alter the chemical composition
Jeremie096 (11:25:41 PM): to high moon
monochromeVIBE (11:25:47 PM):  
and there are personal things to do and alter those "biological" things
Jeremie096 (11:26:03 PM): if you get a sex change operation and change to a vagina, great
monochromeVIBE (11:26:00 PM):  
so i definitly agree with kate bornstein who says "sex is fucking, everything else is gender"
Jeremie096 (11:26:14 PM): but if you have a penis your biology is male
monochromeVIBE (11:26:15 PM):  
to her, everything is a social construction
monochromeVIBE (11:26:24 PM):  
jeremie, your definition is very phallus-centric
monochromeVIBE (11:26:27 PM):  
and that is YOUR definition
monochromeVIBE (11:26:31 PM):  
not everyone else's
Jeremie096 (11:26:39 PM): well that is kind of the function of the penis besides excretion isn't it?
Jeremie096 (11:26:41 PM): sex
monochromeVIBE (11:26:42 PM):  
for instance, i identity as male. and i don't have a penis
Jeremie096 (11:26:45 PM): so its true
Jeremie096 (11:26:52 PM): its not phallus centric
Jeremie096 (11:26:55 PM): the same is true for vaginas
monochromeVIBE (11:26:56 PM):  
sex is also a function of vaginas
monochromeVIBE (11:27:04 PM):  
again, you are phallus centric
Jeremie096 (11:27:19 PM): how exactly?
monochromeVIBE (11:27:27 PM):  
vaginas can be penetrated by far more than a penis. by a dildo, by fingers, by fists.
Jeremie096 (11:27:34 PM): i am not valueing one over the other
Jeremie096 (11:27:49 PM): i don't care what genitalia a person has
monochromeVIBE (11:27:47 PM):  
and so, at this point, by your definitoin a penis is just as male as a dildo, a finger, and a fist
Jeremie096 (11:27:56 PM): but ultimately what you have defines your bioogy
monochromeVIBE (11:28:03 PM):  
well, i disagree with that.
monochromeVIBE (11:28:11 PM):  
and that's what i'm trying to explain, that i disagree.
Jeremie096 (11:28:16 PM): if you have a penis you will use it to penetrate, or not, or at least use it to piss, your biology wil be different
Jeremie096 (11:28:21 PM): there is nothing to disagree
Jeremie096 (11:28:34 PM): this is the scienfitic defintion of sex
Jeremie096 (11:28:42 PM): you can alter your chemical composition to high noon
Jeremie096 (11:28:48 PM): but ultimately the parts you have are the parts you have
Jeremie096 (11:28:53 PM): unless you change your parts
monochromeVIBE (11:30:11 PM):  
there was also i scientific definition saying that the world was heliocentric. that the atom wwas the smallest particle in existence, that gold could be created from other chemicals, that homosexuality was a disorder (and lest we not forget the current scientific stance that transgender/sexuals are a disorder)
monochromeVIBE (11:30:27 PM):  
the parts you have are something you can phsyically, socially, and personally manipulate
Jeremie096 (11:30:32 PM): yes but those were theories
Jeremie096 (11:30:34 PM): not definitons
Jeremie096 (11:30:37 PM): they couldn't be tested
monochromeVIBE (11:30:47 PM):  
the DSM-IV goes to great lengths to define and test it's theories
monochromeVIBE (11:30:54 PM):  
same with the atom
monochromeVIBE (11:30:59 PM):  
jeremie, everything is a theory
monochromeVIBE (11:31:13 PM):  
there might be something to back it up, but just because it is "proved" doesn't mean it's the end-all

Conversation with my brother. The end explains why it ended.

Jeremie096 (11:31:22 PM): saying everything is a theory is like saying all generalizations are false
monochromeVIBE (11:31:25 PM):  
a scientific paradigm is a consistently weak structure
Jeremie096 (11:31:32 PM): it's completely illogical
monochromeVIBE (11:31:37 PM):  
it is one is constantly being challenged by anaomolies
monochromeVIBE (11:31:46 PM):  
by other paradigms that rise and disrupt the paradigm
monochromeVIBE (11:32:00 PM):  
no, saying everything is theory is saying everything is suspetible to change
Jeremie096 (11:32:04 PM): i could claim the statement "everything is a theory" is a theory, and then your whole logic would be destroyed
Jeremie096 (11:32:23 PM): you're making a relative point by using an absolute statement
monochromeVIBE (11:32:20 PM):  
it's saying there is a multiplictiy of truths, rather than holding the dangerous thought that there is one truth
Jeremie096 (11:32:24 PM): which is a fallacy
Jeremie096 (11:32:34 PM): its the first rule of logic 101 you've broken
monochromeVIBE (11:32:43 PM):  
perhaps i don't care about the rule of logic 101
monochromeVIBE (11:32:58 PM):  
perhaps i have a greater investment in sharing with you how dangerous i feel science can be and has been
Jeremie096 (11:33:12 PM): the point is
monochromeVIBE (11:33:09 PM):  
science does have a utility, a great one
monochromeVIBE (11:33:16 PM):  
but everything it constructs is constantly weak
monochromeVIBE (11:33:22 PM):  
and that is a weakness we must be aware of
Jeremie096 (11:33:28 PM): if you decide on your own to change the laws of physics by saying 2 plus 2 is 5
monochromeVIBE (11:33:29 PM):  
and be weary that it can an must change
Jeremie096 (11:33:33 PM): you open the door for 1984 nightmare
monochromeVIBE (11:33:35 PM):  
just as my last statement can and must change
Jeremie096 (11:33:39 PM): science can be evil sure
Jeremie096 (11:33:54 PM): but looking at somoene's biological genetilia
Jeremie096 (11:34:00 PM): to determine their biological makeup
Jeremie096 (11:34:03 PM): is not a relative thing
Jeremie096 (11:34:06 PM): its as absolute as 2 plus 2
Jeremie096 (11:34:09 PM): what's there is there
Jeremie096 (11:34:11 PM): simple as that
Jeremie096 (11:34:21 PM): if you have both parts or none, what's there is there
monochromeVIBE (11:34:21 PM):  
see, i read it differntly. i read that if we maintain rigidly and imposedly that 2 plus 2 is four, we prevent ourselves for seeing the beauty in change, for seeing our own thoughts and paradigms challenged
Jeremie096 (11:34:25 PM): you can't argue with it
Jeremie096 (11:34:47 PM): if you dont believe 2 plus 2 equals 4 then tha's when you become insane
Jeremie096 (11:34:53 PM): becuase it will always be 4
Jeremie096 (11:34:55 PM): and you know that
Jeremie096 (11:35:02 PM): believing otherwise is just an invitation to lunacy
Jeremie096 (11:35:07 PM): and i am all for relativism
Jeremie096 (11:35:08 PM): trust me
Jeremie096 (11:35:14 PM): i hold no absolute moral standards
Jeremie096 (11:35:22 PM): i look at everything i possibly CAN in grey
Jeremie096 (11:35:28 PM): but some things are not grey
Jeremie096 (11:35:30 PM): because again
Jeremie096 (11:35:37 PM): to claim everything is relative
Jeremie096 (11:35:39 PM): is a false statement
Jeremie096 (11:35:47 PM): it just simply is
Jeremie096 (11:35:49 PM): and you know that
monochromeVIBE (11:37:30 PM):  
for instance, what about this 2 plus 2 is 4? i was actually thinking about that the other day in the bathroom. and it came to me. When will we have two entities that are perfect enough to make four? they always held up these two apples or seomthing. so what made them equal? Was it their weight? I doubt they bothered to find out the two apples with EXACTLY the same. Was it their DNA? doubtful they had the same DNA. may have been similiar. Was it their color? Again, what would be the point to measure that? it seems the apple-analogy became a simple way to engrain a fallacy. that two constructs will be equal. when in fact, they are quite deviating. and yet, their similarities cannot be denied. so does 2 plus 2 equal 4? sure. in the loose simple ways professors would like to teach it. but for those who want to break down the exemplared numbers further...2 plus 2 can be about
4.
Jeremie096 (11:37:56 PM): no
Jeremie096 (11:37:59 PM): but 2 is a whole number
Jeremie096 (11:38:03 PM): not a partial number
Jeremie096 (11:38:08 PM): 2.1 is a partial number
monochromeVIBE (11:38:07 PM):  
so? it is still being matched with something jeremie
Jeremie096 (11:38:13 PM): whole numbers ar ewhole numers
monochromeVIBE (11:38:12 PM):  
2 is supposed to represent something
monochromeVIBE (11:38:15 PM):  
just like language
Jeremie096 (11:38:23 PM): if you interpret otherwise, you shatter the fabric of all math
Jeremie096 (11:38:27 PM): and you know what happens when you do that?
monochromeVIBE (11:38:26 PM):  
it becomes a semantical fallacy that 2 can represent something concrete
monochromeVIBE (11:38:39 PM):  
so just like language is a social construction, i see numbers in the same light
Jeremie096 (11:38:49 PM): your internet would not work, your lights shut off, your food is not on the table, society doesn't exist, you can't even light a fire because you don't know how to combine elements
Jeremie096 (11:38:57 PM): that is what you say when you dispute the validity of whole numbers
monochromeVIBE (11:39:05 PM):  
i'm saying jeremie, math has a utlitiy, but it also has a point where it needs to be troubled.
Jeremie096 (11:39:13 PM): 2 does not represent somehting conrete
Jeremie096 (11:39:17 PM): math is a language
monochromeVIBE (11:39:20 PM):  
right. that' s what i just said
Jeremie096 (11:39:24 PM): the END product of math can be interpreted
Jeremie096 (11:39:29 PM): which is why chaos math exits
monochromeVIBE (11:39:29 PM):  
and that' jsut what i just did
monochromeVIBE (11:39:35 PM):  
i interpreted the end product of 4
Jeremie096 (11:39:40 PM): but the processes, the foundations
Jeremie096 (11:39:41 PM): are absolute
monochromeVIBE (11:39:42 PM):  
by looking at it's basic makeup
Jeremie096 (11:40:04 PM): well that's fine, but if i have a penis, i can alter it any which way i want right
Jeremie096 (11:40:09 PM): but the basic foundation is stilla  penis
Jeremie096 (11:40:13 PM): that's the simple fact
monochromeVIBE (11:40:13 PM):  
did you not read zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance?
Jeremie096 (11:40:19 PM): you just argued your way back tot he beginning
monochromeVIBE (11:40:19 PM):  
or  did you just disagree with it all?
Jeremie096 (11:40:24 PM): i did indeed
Jeremie096 (11:40:31 PM): not int he slightest
Jeremie096 (11:40:40 PM): he never reftures the foudnation of basic whole numbers
Jeremie096 (11:40:47 PM): he is attacking the interpretation of quality
Jeremie096 (11:40:54 PM): which has nothing to do witht eh current conversation
monochromeVIBE (11:40:54 PM):  
yes he does. pirsig refutes it when he confronts the scientific hypothesis
monochromeVIBE (11:41:10 PM):  
which is at the core of our present dialogue
Jeremie096 (11:41:31 PM): whole numbers are not a product of the scienfitic METHOD (which is what you meant)
monochromeVIBE (11:41:32 PM):  
the scientific hypothesis is what determines the course we will take in defining (aka controlling) our social environment
Jeremie096 (11:41:40 PM): they existed far before the scienfitic method was ever created
Jeremie096 (11:42:02 PM): again
Jeremie096 (11:42:12 PM): pirsig has nothing to do with the current conversation
Jeremie096 (11:42:38 PM): and to refute the basics of logic and claim that your statement "everything is relative" is valid, is an invitation to lunacy
Jeremie096 (11:42:50 PM): which is what in the end happened to pirsig, following a different but parallel path
Jeremie096 (11:42:51 PM): if you remember
monochromeVIBE (11:42:51 PM):  
yes, we start out with a theory, and then we go along constructing an endless series of possible answers to that theory. and consequently, we present a concrete answer, and that answer is set in stone. we bow down to that stone, and look for the next questions. and yes jeremie, the scientific method has existed for a while. just because it wasn't written down, doesn't mean it wasn't there in some form.
Jeremie096 (11:43:18 PM): the idea of whole numbers predates the scientific method
Jeremie096 (11:43:21 PM): its as simple as that
Jeremie096 (11:44:52 PM): quit your long ass replies please
Jeremie096 (11:44:58 PM): i don't want to hear monologues
Jeremie096 (11:45:03 PM): its just trying to manipulate the conversation
monochromeVIBE (11:45:08 PM):  
i'm not sure that i'm saying everything is relative. but as for lunacy - i welcome that in a way. i welcome the beautiful possibilities that come from changing and altering one's path. and while i do think we can keep everything we have, i also think everything can be rid of. it's not something we need to be afraid of.

May. 1st, 2007

Insomnia kicks in...mmm....

So here's an image I got from the Gay Shame SF site. So perfect...love myself right now.