miércoles, julio 30, 2008


They say men and women can never be friends. Or at least, they never should be friends. I did not have this problem. One of my best friends is a guy. We're like Harry and Sally, minus the tension and the pity-fuck.

Recently, however, I developed that very problem. Or maybe it's more of a friend ditching me because an S. O. made an appearance in his/her life, which is not terribly unusual, but hurtful and disappointing nonetheless.

Recipe: Take a healthy amount of ditching, and add it to a pot already bubbling over with unusual amounts of time spent together, some weird sexual-like tension, semi-uncalled for comments, and a very generous amount of flirting. Add a pinch of kissing and cuddling to taste. When this mixture starts to make your other friends nervous, then you have the perfect base for the next layer: a fight, confusion, disappointment, confrontation, denial, and a lie or five. Add a sprig of secret relationship with other for flavor. With all these ingredients fighting and bubbling and mixing and simmering in a pot, is there room for the friendship that we started with? I don't think so, and it's awkward even thinking that me, friend AND S. O. hang in the same circle and will one day be forced to be in the same room. I am SO dreading that day. What's more, the "secret" of friend and S. O. was effectively kept from me by other friends, in particular, one I considered close and who was living in my house at the time, and another who now has aligned herself with friend, because they were afraid I would be hurt/flip out/hurt them/have to be committed to an insane asylum, or some such shit, which to me means that these people have no idea who I am. The secret is still being kept, and I know because I have only one honest advisor left. It goes without saying, but I'm saying it anyway, that both friend and S. O. are keeping completely mum, preferring that I find out through the changing of the relationship status on Facebook.

I don't really care that friend is in a relationship after swearing up and down he didn't want one, read: didn't want one with me, which is totally fine, and we talked about that, so he knows this, or at least he should. Why in the hell would I want to push someone into loving me? I always felt the fundamental thing was that we enjpoyed each other's company above everything (and everyone) else. Which would mean we would still hang out. The problem I have is that EVERYONE is acting like fucking children. I don't like having friends that feel they need to treat me with kid gloves, like I am some kind of ogre or something. That shit makes me feel worse than anything. I'm a fucking adult, for shit's sake. I'm the oldest one in the crew! Besides, queens are supposed to have an army of advisors loyal to her in some way. At least be somewhat loyal because I met most of these people first and I was the one who brought friend into our circle in the first place. I feel like I have to get a whole new group of friends.

So my question is: am I allowed to not ever invite those two, or some of their accomplices, to any event/outing/social occasion that I plan? Do I get to do that now? Cause, well, I already am, but I wanted to know if it's OK. Yeah, I have a very fucked up and non-linear way of doing things, I know this.

lunes, julio 28, 2008

It's been a long time, shouldn't have left you......

I'm gonna go ahead and dedicate this post to J. H., previously my kryptonite, but now one of my inspirations for picking up a pen. Or a keyboard. As the case may be. I have a lot to say but have had no desire to say it. I don't know why. But I realized that my previous excuse "I don't want to write because I already sit in front of a computer all day" is a bunch of bullshit. What do I do when I get home? Get on the internets with much less noble intentions. In any case, as M. H. said, "it's never too late". Yeah, I just need my ass kicked sometimes.

I talk a lot about the dumbing down of America. I usually blame Bush for it, but recently, I put a little more thought into things. There's no denying that he's helped legitimize the idiot's case in a major way. Just look at the 2004 election. But this has been a phenomenon I have observed for a long time now, beginning probably around 1997, when I was a junior in college, lamenting the younger classes with their rich parents (read: no tuition assistance needed) and their harder drugs. That was the end of SLC as an "Art School" and the beginning of it as a sort of "Confederacy of Dunces", if you will. When SLC was an art school, there were a bunch of different personalities, but all with one thing in common: We were the high school rejects. We were never popular because we weren't interested in the trivial shit ("When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." - Jonathan Swift. I really don't care how elitist that makes me look, by the way) or we were different in some sort of way, like how we dressed and what sex we got it on with. We were the writers, the artists, the actors. The loners, the weird drama kids. So we finally got our something at SLC. At least that's how I felt. But the "cool kids" always find a way to ruin it for the rest of us. In that sense, they aren't so stupid and clueless. At the end of my junior year, when it came out exactly how many overdoses/hospital visits had happened during the course of the year, the campus shut down and went into insular mode, meaning all social activity ceased. I visited SLC in September 1999 and was amazed to see that no one was hanging out on the lawn. Used to be that the lawn was the place to meet all the new kids, to dance around, to write, to hang out in the warm weather. Honestly, it looked sort of like a Dead concert without the acid. Coincidentally, I spent a good bit of time listening to "Uncle John's Band" and whatnot on the lawn, but anyway..... Things looked boring and a little scary/surreal to me. Cool kids win again. And SLC was all the dumber for it. So don't ask me why I never give them money. They lost themselves in the drive to stop giving out too much aid, to attract more male students, to make it a more homogenous experience. TO RUIN IT.

So, 2008 and the Internets. Last year, I signed up for a (fairly) new website in which people wrote reviews of restaurants, parks, monuments, etc., and there was this kick-ass community attached to it. I really enjoyed it. I wasted shitloads of time there. I met several excellent people. Also learned a lot of lessons, some about human nature, some about not expecting too much from people. But recently, it has been hijacked. Not really, but there's a new crowd. They don't talk about anything important. They seem to like to sound very intelligent when the mood strikes, but whenever they do, it reeks of an opportunity to blast someone else, not to actually put out some sort of actual thought. Nothing new. So a bunch of the original community live in exile, because they just don't enjoy these other people. So someone starts a thread about how some of this new shit/people just isn't/aren't funny. I agree, and I said so. Their reply? "There's no profit in trying to categorically decide what is and isn't funny." But it SURE IS "profitable" to spend all day not thinking and commenting about boners, isn't it? It was a self-preservation tactic on his part, so I'll let that slide, even though he's basically saying "We're idiots and shut up about it" in a very varity football kind of way. Whatever. I'll let them win again. Most of the OG's have lost interest, and funnily enough, that includes "the mayor". Just don't be surprised when it's all RUINED. And let me add here that there is something about kids born in the eighties, like after 81 or 82. Some are OK. Most of them are just weird.

So is this blog my new self-imposed exile? We'll see.