(orgasm… there’s that word again)
a couple of days i read the most wonderful posting on the reality sandwich website. joan of art, the author of this particular entry titled ‘sustainable love’, meanders through a number of topics: sex and gender roles, anal sex, her dysfunctional childhood, her relationship with her deceased father, what it means to love gaia, and other wild stuff, and beautifully ties it all together, while allowing each reader to take from it what he or she needs.
while i certainly can’t relate on every level presented here, one section in particular set off bells in my head:
Intimacy, honesty, personal responsibility, self-knowledge, love, cooperation, and the mutual respect for boundaries are paramount if we stand a chance at achieving sustainable love. Too much karma is exchanged during sexual intercourse to warrant continued casual sex without a solid basis of friendship an acceptable meme for conscious beings unless one doesn’t mind unintentionally swallowing someone’s etheric load. Who wants to be carrying around someone’s karmic burden when you just wanted an innocent orgasm?
and she goes on: “We have bigger tasks to focus on than getting caught-up in sticky erotic entanglements that don’t have the bigger picture of our life paths in mind” (emphasis mine). amen. i mean, i read that and i was like damn, this is what i had been doing with the sgc for the better part of the year, and it probably only stopped being erotic (despite the fact that i really didn’t like him as a person) because it turned briefly into a legal entanglement. during this time, well, yes, i accomplished what i needed to as far as work, school, etc., but there was always some overriding bullshit drama going on with him, either that, or we had just had incredible sex so he could get away with murder within a certain time frame afterwards. then again, the reason the sex was so good was because most everything else was so terrible between us. we could get along like normal people for awhile, then one person would say something to set the other off (or he’d ask me for money), and the bullshit would begin anew. the sex was a release of the tension and anger that was constantly simmering between us, although i guess i shouldn’t speak for him. i mean, he did have his anger issues, but i think they had to do with women in general and not me in particular – i was a stand-in for all the women who had previously ‘done him wrong.’ still, i wasn’t innocent: i remember once noticing a long scratch mark on his back, and thinking, ‘wow i did that… i hope it hurt.’ what is that based on if not anger?
but i digress… this entry by joan is marvelous. it will become a part of my canon of life manifestos (not that this collection actually exists… yet). the reason for this is not only because of what is mentioned in previous paragraphs, but what she has written toward the end. she is writing of love and relationships and how oftentimes we feel it is our job in a relationship to somehow ‘save’ the other person, but really, while our love may act as a catalyst for that person to save him or herself, that person is the only one who can actually do it. and then, she just blows me away with this:
If our liberation resides in non-attachment to ALL areas of life, we must at least entertain the notion that the things and people we hold most precious in life – including our Earth – are the things we must let go of in order to be truly free.
the letting go of attachments to people makes sense to me, because i’m going through that now with my own family, although it’s not by my choice. however, letting go of the idea that we are the ones who are supposed to save the earth, hmmm, well, that’s hard because basically the earth is our home; we have nowhere else to go. it’s almost like the ultimate codependent relationship in that regard. but you know, basically, humanity has torn our home up, and the earth is saying ‘enuf is enuf, y’all gotz ta go.’ honestly, i don’t know how humanity will end up in the big picture; i certainly don’t think we’ll survive with the numbers that we have going on now. however, my point here is that earth’s agenda is beyond humanity’s agenda, and she is going to do whatever it takes for her to be well, even if it means most (or even all) of the human race ends up going extinct. the individual human body is a microcosm of the planet, and if you realize that the body is constantly doing what it can to keep itself in a healthy state no matter what is done to it, well, why wouldn’t the planet be the same? (read the world without us by alan weisman for perfect illustrations of this.) there comes a point when the body says enough is enough and shuts down until it is well again (or it dies…). the earth, as a sentient being in her own right, certainly can, and, if pushed as she is being pushed now, will ‘shut down’ as well, although i certainly don’t know what that will look like. i do think we are getting a foreshadowing of that now though, not just physically, but culturally and socially as well.
i write all that just to point out that true love for the earth will allow her to do what she needs to do, just as in when ending a relationship, love allows each party to do what he or she needs to do to take care of one’s self. yes, we should do all the proper ‘green’ things, like recycling, riding our bikes and using public transportation when possible, for starters, and making our views on environmental degradation known to those in power (although i still think we are most likely to just get lip service in return). it is our responsibility to take care of our home to the best of our ability (and also to experience pleasure in what she offers us to the best of our ability). however, we need to let go of any expectations about the outcome of our actions. we need to ‘do the right thing’, and knowing that we have done that, just go with the flow of whatever happens. i love, and will end with this quote of joan’s: “If we really do love the Earth, let the love for her bounty and beauty be the guiding force in saving her and not selfish anthrocentricism and survivalism.”