Thursday, February 16, 2017

When She Came Back

Soft footfalls whisper through the sterile white room, announcing the woman’s return. I can tell that she’s trying to be quiet, trying not to intrude. I don’t look up at her--can’t look up.

My vision is so blurred that I can barely distinguish the soft outline of the silvery creature curled up in my lap. Her nervous purrs are so loud they even rumble through my own body. How absurd, I think, to care so much for such a tiny thing. Only fools equate things that aren’t human with people.

So I must be a fool then. Why else would the silky fur in my arms be getting so damp? Why else would hot tears fling themselves from my lashes every time I blink? I feel somehow like a cheat; a fraud. I shouldn’t get to feel such exquisite despair over something so trivial.

Shame immediately follows this thought.

She’s not trivial. And she’s not something--she’s someone. The world’s inability to see and validate her worth doesn’t negate it. She doesn’t have to be anything to the world to be everything to me.

And there it is. Absurd as it seems, I really have allowed her to become everything. I’d thought this little friend was a safe place to store my heart. Far safer a repository than any human, at least. She’s the one constant I could always count on to help me navigate the rough transition into adulthood. She’s seen me through years of depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and thoughts of suicide. I’ve hidden those struggles from everyone else because I’m afraid of how they’d see me. Humans hide their true feelings from other humans. Because humans judge. Humans are fickle. Humans leave.

On the other hand, humans tend to evade death longer than pretty much everyone else--and therein lies the problem: I am endlessly reliant on an all too ephemeral friend.

Even so, I’d assumed I still had plenty of time left with her. She’s only six. What are the odds that her kidneys would fail at such a young age? How could I predict that I would be told right away that there’s no hope, that each moment she’s kept alive only prolongs her suffering?

The man sitting beside me gently puts his hand on my shoulder. “Are you ready?”

I shake my head, curling into a ball around her, burying my face into her long grey fur. Her breathing has become labored. With my face pressed against her cheek now, I can hear the soft wheeze inside each of her ragged breaths.

Awkwardly, the man pats my back as my shoulders heave with sobs. I barely know this person; he’s more acquaintance than friend. But he’s been kind enough to pick me up and take me here at 2:00 in the morning anyway--after a panicked phone call where I explained that I’d found her under my bed, unable to move. He didn’t ask whether there was anyone else I could call. My inability to foster close relationships is no secret.

I recently ended a five year relationship. During those five years, I’d kept all my family and friends at arm’s length. I seem to have burned all my bridges without considering the frailty of my own tiny island. Despite all this, there are a handful of people who are still somehow willing to put up with my nonsense--but none that would be awake at such an hour.

So here we are. I take a deep breath, sit up straight, and nod. I’m ready. But I keep my eyes lowered. I still haven’t seen the face of the woman standing over me--I’m not ready yet to look death in the eye. I can see, though, the short, bare nails on her fingertips. As she brings her hands toward my lap, I notice that they’re a soft, overly-scrubbed sort of pink. They look like a healer’s hands, I think.

My little girl starts purring louder as those soft hands apply gentle pressure to her leg. They gracefully thread a needle into the rising vein running beneath her pale skin. Finally, those gentle hands press the back of the syringe, driving its poison into my best friend. The rumbling in my lap stills. She draws one final, shuddering breath. Then, the tiny heart that’s been beating alongside mine for years...stops.

***
I expected the grief. When it rolled over me, I was ready. What I hadn’t expected, though, was the gratitude. When that wave hit, it nearly knocked me over with its immensity. I can’t explain how...thankful...I felt as I watched my little friend’s soul retreat behind her eyes. She’d taught me how to love with my whole heart. I learned that I needed to stop wielding fear like some sort of shield. I needed to finally grow up--to allow myself to be vulnerable with other people; it’s the only path that leads to a place where life is worthwhile.

Now, looking back through all these years, my gratitude to her still runs just as deep. Long before I ever had children, she taught me how it feels to love as a mother. She also gave me a soft landing onto the other side of love’s coin. She gently reaffirmed that truly caring for someone involves building up an exponential debt that must always be paid in the end.

But to merely say that it was worth it does her a great disservice. She showed me that I could open myself up, that I could care recklessly for something completely outside my own control. She showed me that I could survive the loss of my favorite person.

Finally, she showed me the way to meet her again. The best of those we’ve lost still exists: it lies dormant inside you and me, waiting for us to brave the pain of future loss again. From an undiscovered, unbound place, the spirits of devotion feed us dreams of their resurrection. I learned that I have the power to bring them back. All of us do. And that gift is so much more than worth the pain. It is worth everything. In its wake, we are changed forever. That’s the part of love that stays with us. It’s the only part we get to keep when everything else has gone.

It’s the part that’s eternal.

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

The Wild-Goose Chase





I've been thinking a lot about the word meaning. Specifically, the meaning of life. I'm fascinated by the almost universal compulsion to look for someone, or something to tell us why we're here and what we're supposed to do. If there is some specific purpose to an individual's life, the majority of people don't seem to be able to agree on just what it could be. And if a person is never able to gain insight into this meaning before they die, is there an implication that their life has meant less as a result?


I was talking with my dad a few months ago about biocentrism--the classic example is that if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? It seems at first like it would and that you would have to be ridiculously egocentric to assume otherwise. But when you consider it objectively, the only thing that's really occurring is that a tree has fallen and as a result has caused waves of mechanical energy to move through the surrounding air. If there is an animal capable of hearing nearby, their ears will interpret those waves as sound. Sound is just a perception of the waves--not an event unto itself. When I really understood what my dad was saying, it blew my mind just a bit.

So. back to meaning. Does the idea of one true, overarching meaning of life really add more practical meaning to the billions of people on this planet? Especially when you consider that most people are inclined to search for some kind of meaning for their lives but there is very little overall consensus on just what that meaning could be. There are billions of people attempting to build their own narrative in an attempt to make sense of the confounding blend of cruelty, compassion, love, loss, despair, hope, harmony, and chaos that make up our lives. But if only one narrative is correct, then it follows that the lives of the majority of the people on this planet are less meaningful than the small percentage who have found this elusive true meaning. It seems like a safe assumption to say that most people would ideally like to live a meaningful, fulfilling life but with thousands of differing philosophies out there--even making the assumption that one of them is spot on--odds are hardly stacked in anyone's favor.

But I wonder.  Could meaning be like sound? Not some objective part of reality that exists independent of us (like a train that we've got to catch if we ever hope to reach our destination) but rather something that we subjectively perceive? Maybe it's something that each of build a little bit every day. I'm starting to think that by searching for some supposed Ultimate Meaning, I might be missing the whole point. It seems a bit like spending your entire life searching for the one true piece of art, music, poetry, or nature only to be left blind and deaf to the almost limitless beauty that surrounds us every day. I love the idea of all of us building our own meaning and purpose--no one person's meaning diminishing anyone else's but rather all of them adding to the stunning tapestry that is our common experience.*


*The exception being people who let their sadistic tendencies get the better of them.  If whatever meaning you've found allows room for crapping all over other people, you're on your own.  I'm looking specifically at all you pedos out there. You know who you are. I refuse to have any poop in my fancy tapestry.

Saturday, October 26, 2013

Slippery Slope

I got wrapped up in one of those ridiculous online discussions today.  You know the kind: everyone involved arrogantly touts their opinion without the slightest regard or respect to those with whom they're disagreeing. The goal, of course, is to get the opposing side to feel totally foolish for their obvious lack of insight and then to bask in the prowess of our own intellect.  It's always such a surprise when it doesn't work out that way.

The argument was a well worn one: the slippery slope argument relating to gay marriage becoming legal.  Now that the the door has been opened to making marriage more inclusive, will it just open wider and wider to include polygamous, incestuous, and who-knows-what type of marriages? I had always dismissed this as absurd but now I'm not so sure.  I sarcastically commented on a thread that the slippery slope had really started when people decided that it was okay for interracial couples to get married. As I thought about it, though, I realized that it might be true.  Lawmakers decided then that people had the right to marry outside of their race despite the fact that many people at the time had a strong conviction that such a union was immoral. The idea being that laws should protect the rights of the individual rather than the sensitivities of the moral majority.

So will the next natural step in marriage expansion be polygamy? I don't know.  Historically in the US, the big problem with polygamy has been the sexual exploitation of children. If sufficient checks could be put in place so that lawmakers could be sure that it wouldn't result in child abuse, such as making it legal only if all participants are 18+, it does seem plausible. And would it really be a bad thing?  I guess it depends on how you see marriage.  To me, it was first finding someone who can make my soul sing and then making the decision together to move forward in life as a committed team. I have no interest in having more than one partner but it doesn't seem logical to ban polygamy just because it doesn't appeal to me personally. Incentive for the current polygamy laws to change seems severely lacking but anything is possible.*

And then what?  Marrying your sister, the three snails in your backyard,  or even the Eiffel Tower?** There are obvious inherent legal problems involved when trying to expand marriage to encompass more than two adults who are able to give consent.  For the sake of this argument, let's assume that everything may someday be fair game when it comes to marriage except for when it amounts to abuse of anyone involved - particularly children, animals, and adults who are incapable of giving consent. If we eventually eliminate all restrictions involving who, what, and how many we can marry, what is the furthest extreme that it can be carried to? As best as I can tell, it's something like this: the option of making a legal vow to love, honor, and cherish everyone and everything. But honestly.  Who in their right mind would want to make that kind of commitment?  It's not quite my bag but different stroke for different folks, right?



 **Erica Eiffel has already married the Eiffel Tower so it's off limits for anyone else until the polygamy hurdle is cleared

* I recently read an article that has me rethinking my stance of polygamy. It makes a compelling case for how it could actually be damaging to society if 3% or more of the population decides to participate. Here's a link of anyone's interested. http://reason.com/archives/2006/04/03/one-man-many-wives-big-problem