Tuesday, March 3, 2009

That was then, This is now


Last night we were watching our favorite television show, (can you guess?) 'Key West'. For the twenty or thirty-something time we sat and watched Seamus stand in stunned amazement at winning the lottery while babes in skimpy swimsuits jump up and down around him. He jumps in his auto and heads south to the place he's always dreamed of going- Key West, one of the homes of Hemingway and Tennessee Williams. In a moment of symbolic portent, he drives his car to the end of the world and into the water at the end of Highway 1 (Highway 1 does not really end at the ocean's edge but it's great for effect). Not content with the possibility that the car may have survived the attempted drowning, he takes a revolver out of his jacket and shoots his car, assuring himself of his intent to stay.

Seaumus's introduction to the island moves quickly from here. Jo Jo, a Rastafarian immigrant, takes him to the newspaper where Seamus meets Cole, the newspaper editor, and gets his first assignment. Then off to Gumbo's, the end of the world bar and cafe where he finds an enraged barkeep threatening his island tour agent (Gumbo and Jo Jo have a slight disagreement over the girls in the bar). And we meet Savannah, the personification of the sexual soul of the island. Savannah (played with finesse and gentility by Jennifer Tilly) meets Seamus and gives him a taste of what he is really encountering by coming to Key West- it's not just a tropical vacation land, as she says, it's "magic here. There are Angels in the Spray, Wizards in the Palm Trees, and Elves in the Sea Shells..." Later, she meets a client, a young boy whose father has hired her for his defloweration. Her words to him? "Today, you're gonna learn everything you're ever gonna need to know about women. I'm gonna teach you. And when you walk outta here tonight you're gonna have a Ph.D. in me. And your stock is gonna soar. And your self-confidence is gonna go through the roof." In yet another scene she goes to the home of a woman who was injured in a car accident to be the woman's body for her husband. It is positively electric to see her sensuality working it's own magic on the inhabitants of the little island.

I first watched this show in July of 2005 with Maurice. There was a moment that seemed faintly familiar but the newness of the show overshadowed the vague familiarity and I let the moment flutter past, a memory butterfly heading for the next shaft of sunlight. At a later date, however, the moment was so poignant that I nearly caught my breath, recalling a night years earlier (it would have been January, 19 of '93 although I could not have told you the date when the sensation occurred) when I had flipped the channel to the new little station, Fox, to see what they were airing from lack of anything better to watch. Initially I was probably intrigued by the woman sitting in the wheelchair, informing the beautiful raven haired vision that she had been in an accident and she wanted her (Savannah) to be her body. But the scene was so overtly sexual that my own, then suppressed and stifled, sexuality was immediately offended by the implications of what the woman was suggesting.

I do not feel that I can adequately explain to you what I mean by "suppressed". Being raised in a fundamentalist christian home is one thing but there was background that clearly influenced my upbringing-- background that I did not fully understand of at the time and some I just didn't know.

Christianity itself is afraid of sexuality. At all points in the history of the church-- and even earlier among the Jews-- the followers of Yahweh have demonized women and marginalized them almost beyond recognition. The historical background of this is delineated by Sue Monk Kidd in her book Dance of the Dissident Daughter in far more detail than I have time to do here, but suffice it to say that the male-god images in Christianity were a powerful metaphor for the domination of the male in the home, the church and in politics (which was integrally connected to the church). It is not insignificant that the church remains one of the final institutions where women are simply not allowed to hold certain positions of leadership. It is this very connection to the godhead that gives christian men an authority that moves beyond humanity and places any woman in an automatic role of subordination. What little girls quickly learn is that momma has no power, momma is a lesser species and DADDY is like god. When, like in my case, daddy could care less that there is a little girl underfoot and the mother is too young to know anything about raising children- who was still a child herself- the implications to her personage are profound.

Add to this, my parent's sinful start... Having been nabbed by the church in their indiscretion and then having to face the judgment of people who, if truth be told were undoubtedly engaged in far uglier behavior than a youthful moment of passion, and you begin to see why I was a less than welcome presence for a man who was trapped into marriage. (The implications of living life "in community" where you are put in the position of living up to the expectations of the people of the church is yet another topic for another day- but it is appalling to envision the young couple weeping and begging forgiveness from people that had no business being involved in the situation in the first place.)

On top of that, recent revelations revealed that my mother was sexually molested by her brothers. It is obvious that her fear of men and their passions (and possibly her own) helped shape the opinions she spouted in regard to men and marriage to me. Having never dealt with the reality of the molestation, (to this day her relationship with her brothers remains outwardly like anyone else's. In the name of "forgiveness" my mother pretended it never happened and thus exposed other women, including myself, in the family to the same abuses. While understandable considering the fifties were a suppressed age that finally gave way to the "free love" generation, her insistence today that she was noble for forgiving them, is somewhat appalling), she married a man who had been raised by parents who were smothered with fear of sexual sin and had raised a son who was sexually repressed. (I don't know if there are more secrets concerning this particular emphasis. Most likely there was more abuse.) At any rate, there were many prejudices that were passed on to me and I was handed this information without full disclosure-- even into adulthood. (Had I known the background of my mother's abuse, some of the hysteria she imposed on me might have been diminished).

At any rate, all of these influences lent themselves to shaping my identity and I developed a sense of repugnance for my own sexuality.

Unfortunately, sexual urges are not like alcoholism or drug addiction-- they are an appetite that is more akin to the need for nutrition to the body. And it really is with great effort that you subordinate it-- especially to the extent that I controlled it. I was determined that I would not be controlled in any way by sexual urges. And in order to do so, I had to eradicate any visual or even musical stimulation-- even books that were sexually suggestive were taboo with the intent of keeping my "thoughtlife" pure. Sexually suggestive jokes were forbidden and even a friend's sexual disclosures caused a rosiness on my cheeks that exposed my discomfort. I worked very hard to be as pious as a priest in terms of my sexuality. The fact that I even had sex with my X is really evidence of further control by the church-- having been reprimanded at some point that it is a wifely responsibility not to withhold sex, I felt it was a... "necessary evil" so to speak.

It was at this point in my life that I watched the woman speaking to her husband about the passion they had once shared and saw Savannah's hand brush the man's cheek (he was blindfolded). The scene then switched to a darkened room with a black woman hovering around candles humming, working her voodoo.

Voodoo-- demons-- devil--

That was enough.

I changed the station away from the sinful scene, afraid to expose myself to the intensely carnal scene (nothing illicit is actually shown- the implication was enough) and the hint of black magic, I never darkened the doors of the Fox channel on Tuesday at 8 p.m. again.

That was then...

Since that time, having watched the show so many times now, I have gained an understanding of the connection that Savannah has to the island. And in addition to that I have also reconciled myself to myself. I have learned that my own sexuality is not something to be ashamed or afraid of and I can watch that scene with genuine appreciation. In fact it is remarkable to see a woman in such an intensely sexual manner without the usual focus of a cheap slut who is there to titillate and tie viewers to the screen with the tawdriness of it. While it is difficult to understand the nuances for many, Savannah's sexuality is intentionally oppositional to the mainstream T&A we see on television. Her mocking attitude toward the prince and his "staying power" and the speech she gives the "cherry" is a role reversal. Her intention to teach the young man about women is a distinctly different role than the one the prostitute generally plays-- one of sex toy to a man who has no interest in the woman he is with let alone pleasing her! This is a sexuality where the goal is to "know" women and to have them follow the boy around because he treats them well. It's revolutionary-- even 16 years after it was first aired. (After all, sexuality on American television remains very juvenile)

As I watch today I watch the scene with sincere admiration. It is, in fact, one of my favorite scenes. I now understand that my own sensuality is as much a part of who I am as the birthmark on my leg... as much a part of who I am as the course, curly ash-blond hair on top of my head. And celebrating the sexual soul is celebrating life and humanity!

Celebrating me!

This is now!

Monday, March 2, 2009

Quote for the day



Develop an interest in life as you see it; the people, things, literature, music- the world is so rich, simply throbbing with rich treasures... Forget yourself.” ~~Henry Miller

Friday, February 27, 2009

Now here's a politician...

Playwright and Hollywood writer David Beaird created this character for the first episode of 'Key West'...Mayor Pembrooke. The speech he gives at this political rally is wonderful because he speaks to the heart of what we are missing today-- a spirit of service. Too often we think of service as a volunteer or a donor to a charitable agency-- in this case I am talking about having a government that recognizes that it is its responsibility to protect the people, to serve people. In the episode, Pembrooke is running against a Republican woman (Chaucey Caldwell played by Denise Crosby) who is allied with the wealthiest man in town and others in the business community. She also has supporters among the religious community as we find out later. In Key West(the actual city) tensions were high during the making of the show over the business community's desire to be more tourist friendly (a battle that continues- or has been mostly lost- today) He says, "I am for abortion rights. I am for gay rights. I am for human rights. I also want the right to put some criminals in jail and throw away the key! And I want the right to demand that all those on welfare get off of welfare as soon as humanly possible. I am my brother's and my sister's keeper, not their sugar daddy. If you can work and you do not work, I am for your right to starve to death!

But, if you are old or disabled, or a child born into a poverty not of your making and beyond your understanding, if you are new to these shores and are confused and unable to speak the language, if you are a woman whose husband has died, and you are breaking your back to feed your children, then it is our obligation, our right, our joy to take you in, to wrap you in our arms and shelter you against the storm, to hold you safe against our breast and to make you understand that on this, the darkest night of all our lives none of us is really safe.

The storm that has blown your houses down one day will rage for us. And the only structures that will stand are the bridges that we build from misfortune to compassion. From denial to consciousness. From one heart to another. We are, thank god, our brother's and our sister's keepers. And this is our safety. And our joy. And our salvation."

Thursday, February 26, 2009

An unpopular position

There is a phenomenon that can happen among those who have been victimized-- and while I know that I am not taking a P.C. position on this, it is an issue that should be addressed-- if, for no other reason, often those who wind up being the final victims are children.

It is not an unusual occurance-- Victim becomes abuser. Unfortunately, being a victim does not necessarily mean sensitivity for victims! Historically this has been true-- obviously it is not unusual for an abused child to grow up and abuse his or her children. It was a well known phenomenon among slaves-- the ones with more prestige were oppressive and victimized the less powerful among them. Women are hit by their husbands and when one fist hits one cheek the woman's hand goes out to slap the face of her child. It's a sad reality that cannot be excused by the initial violence. Even on a societal level it is not unusual for groups to impose rules on another that they themselves would find abhorrent. For instance, the black community voted against Prop 8 in California, banning gays from marriage. Blacks hate hispanics and hispanics hate blacks. Chinese hate Taiwanese-- japanese hate Chinese, Indians hate Pakistani (which is also a religion problem and don't underestimate the role religion plays in feeding hatred and prejudices) Hatred begets hatred. (And to further your outrage at my unpopular opinion: racism didn't begin with white Europeans.)

I have tried not to use personal experience too much on this blog but perhaps it's time...

My X was a master at this– if he felt that I was taking on too much of a role in raising his son or influencing the financial decisions that he was making, then he reminded that I was ONLY a white person. And he reinforced this with our children. “You know your mother is white– she’s not hip. She doesn’t get it.” (marginalize, marginalize, she’s a nobody, she’s a nobody) My daughter (whom he beat one dark night) was heavily influenced by this and when we divorced, she would not live with me and as I have also stated, became as abusive as he was toward me. Sadly I myself fell into the trap that his experiences with racism as a child and an abusive parent would give him a sensitivity concerning race and abuse-- I was wrong. As I well knew, he was ignored in the classroom. He was harassed by the police. He was beaten by his father (step-father, really) But does this give him cartes blanches to turn it on me? Does it give him the right to control and manipulate (and in some cases become physically aggressive) with my daughters? But it was my sympathy concerning his experience with racism that allowed him to keep disappearing me and gave him the leverage to do it to them-- and worse leave them with the feeling that this was normal and okay. (And frankly, it wasn’t just his prejudice toward white people– it was a hatred for women. He treated me just like his father treated his mother. The white part was a convenient way to try and disconnect me from my daughters.)

In another, less personal situation, a young black woman penned a new book this last year. The book was about an issue of some import– a history of the Ku Klux Klan in Denver. But it was poorly written and received a bad review for being POORLY written (I know the reviewer well and I KNOW she would not reject the book if it were well written). The author emailed, called her, pushed her, bullied her into changing the review. She didn’t do herself any favors by doing this- nor did she do her book any favors. A better written tome on this ugly time in Denver would have been so much more effective! But she got her good review and stifled free speech in the process.

Some young(hispanic)men in the building I work in stole a camera from a paraprofessional (who happens to be black- although in this case I think it's more significant that the para is a woman). The young men are under the supervision of the assistant principal (who is black and hispanic but it seems more significant that he is a man- although he clearly does feel sorry for the poor hispanic boys because he feels the are headed toward disaster because their culture does not value anything that will give them any true hope for a better future...) because they have gotten into a lot of trouble-- pre-gang behavior. But when the woman accused the boys, a strange thing happened. The assistant principal called them into his office and said, "Louis (I made up the name here) said he saw you guys with Ms. C's camera. Do you have it?" But of course they all said no. And that was where the matter ended. No locker check- no questioning of individuals-- and naming the person who pinpointed them may have resulted in his receiving a pummeling. Procedure wasn't followed because this principal is too interested in saving his young hispanic men to care if they have learned the wrong lesson in all this.

When the oppressed take the role of oppressor then the cycle continues to continue in the neverending cycle of oppression. And if we don't recognize and hold accountable those who become oppressors via their own status of victimhood, then we give a rubber stamp to yet another abuse. Just a cursory a moment of deliberation would add some sanity to this issue, but the knee jerk reaction of many liberals who believe that you can't speak on a subject unless you have experienced it, allows the abuse cycle to go unaddressed. After all, if all blacks are victims that are beyond reproach then how can you hold them accountable for abuse they may themselves issue??? And who is it that often incurs the wrath of the abuse? Their children.

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...