Other People's Lives

Two blogs of gay men in America - Jay and Brian.

Jay has been trying desperately to pull together enough confidence to come out - and yesterday gave up. He's deleted most of his blog, leaving just the farewell message that he's decided to retreat deep into the closet and give up all thoughts of being open.

Presumably he thinks he'll learn to be happy like that, even though it was the immense frustration of living in secrecy which made him want to come out in the first place. Not that coming out makes you happy on it's own, but it helps.

Openness and honesty won't automatically make other people happy with you - sometimes just the opposite - but it does seem to be a prerequisite for being happy with yourself.

And what gives you the confidence to be open with others? Obviously it's being in a community that doesn't react with horror when you try. Not everyone you meet, but at the least a small circle of friends.

And that's what Jay lacks, seemingly. He has family, but they're just as useless as most families in this department. He has acquaintances, but no one closer. He does have blog and email, and internet presence can give you a virtual support network, but online friends aren't really a substitute for the flesh-and-blood kind.


I don't want to be too simplistic and deterministic about this. There's always mavericks who buck the trend. I'm one of those strange people who, in spite of a shame-filled protestant upbringing (or because of it?), have always had zero patience with the idiotic positions people take on sexual morality. Stuff like:

* "Wait for love to happen, get married, and fight to stay together". I see, so you can't force love, but you should force it after it's gone, but only if you're married.

* "If you're happily monogamous, you're repressed and in denial.". Or you might just be in love. It's possible to do the coventional thing for good reasons.

* "I don't mind gay people, as long as they don't act gay". I do mind you being a hypocrite. And don't expect me to be grateful for your benevolent tolerance of my supposed imperfection.

* "Being gay is cool". An inverted prejudice is still a prejudice.

* "Free love is liberating". It can be. Being pressured to have lots of sex to prove how liberated you are from pressure, isn't.

* "True love is spiritual, beyond sex". Yes yes, you can love someone without genital friction being involved - this is trivially true. What you mean is, the less lovers think about friction, the deeper and higher their love. But put like that without obfuscation, it's evidently untrue.

* "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve". God's a fairytale, you fuckwit. Besides, what you really mean is:

* "Sex is for reproduction only, any other use is wrong". The first clause is patently false, and the second wouldn't follow anyway.


Brian, who left a comment on my last post, is the opposite of Jay. Out and confident, he lives with partner L and their adopted baby son E - the kind of goofy adorable handful children are supposed to be. Oh, and an equally adorable big floppy rottweiler mix, name of Nemo.

Politically aware but not active, nonreligious but not militant about it, settled but not inactive.

It all sounds like the kind of life that was mapped out for me a decade ago - domestic future with monogamous partner and adopted baby plus dog. In my case it fortunately went wrong - I'd make a lousy father.


Stuff in the post today:
* An oil lamp for father. He collects them, for reasons I've never understood. Last month mother went through a phase of collecting Rubik puzzles - we now have the complete set, arranged along the fireplace.
* My new switch/solo card. The card numbering system can't handle this being the 10th issue, so it's issue number zero. First purchase - a wallet to put it in.
* A bundle of clothes for me. You may remember I said something about white lycra shorts a few days ago, well....
* And a collar for Dino. They've sent the wrong one - it's too small and...it's got a bowtie. Yes, a dogcollar with a miniature red bowtie attatched. Very...sweet.


Phone call from Craig and Roxanne last night, offering to buy me a drink. This is code for "need someone to talk something over with, and you're good at that sort of thing, so could you meet us in the One Eyed Dog please". And it's also an offer to buy me a drink.

So, over two bottles of extremely bad red house wine, we spoke of love and loss, self-esteem and self-emancipation, relationships and rotten luck. And then I got introduced to a drink called "Ouzo" - Turkish, aniseed, strong and in my humble opinion absolutely revolting.

On my gravestone will be the words: Here lies Kapitano. He sang at our parties, gave good advice and got drunk very easily.


Oh yes - good news for those who use my skills as agony uncle and wise old dispenser of sage advice: I can't possibly afford to do teacher training at the moment. Not without getting into debt - I've been there once, and I'm determined not to go there again.

So, I'm stuck in bloody Portsmouth, for another year at least. But I am stuck with people who value me.

7 comments:

  1. So sorry, but are you saying you HAVE TO PAY to be trained as a teacher? I could have sworn there was a commercial on tv a while back offering a 'golden hello' to people who signed up to be teachers.
    Obviously I'm senile and it was a governmental golden shower instead. It's rather pathetic that we are short of good teachers - or any teachers - and yet they're letting you get away.
    Bah. When's Tony off?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ah. To answer your first question:

    A 2-year conversion course, like the ones I'm looking at, is really 2 consecutive courses. The 1st year teaches the subject that you will be trained to teach, and the 2nd teaches you to teach it.

    So, if I'm to be trained as a science teacher, I spend 1 year studying science, then 1 year for the actual PGCE, learning how to teach the science I learned in the 1st year.

    For the 1st year, I pay course fees (probably £1500-2000), and I pay for lodgings, food, etc. For the 2nd year, my local education authority pays the course fees, and the government gives me £5000-6000 as a "golden hello", which will of course be spent paying back debts incurred during the first year.

    When I said I couldn't afford to do the course, I meant I couldn't afford to support myself while doing it.

    So, you may ask, why don't I just do a 1 year science PGCE? Because I don't have a degree in science.

    Why don't I do a 1 year PGCE in art, which I do have a degree in? Because (1) the "golden hello" is only given to science (and IT) teachers, meaning I'd probably be in debt by the end of the course and (2) there are already far more people quallified to teach art than there are posts for them to fill, wheras there's a shortage of science (and computer) teachers.

    As for the second question:

    The Labour Party (unlike the Tories) has no real mechanisms for deposing it's own leader.

    A vote of no confidence at the party conference would do it, but the conference is now stagemanaged and sealed tight by Tony's Cronies. Remember what happened when one man shouted "Rubbish!" at the last one.

    An MP could force an internal election by announcing that he's standing against Blair for the leadership. But the only MPs would would think of doing that are those who might possibly win - and that list has one name on it: Gordon Brown. And Brown expects to be leader at some point anyway.

    So, in principle Tony can hang on till the next general election. In practice he's leaving it as long as possible, in the hope that all the messes he's caused will get better somehow before he has to go.

    That way, he appears to leave a legacy of progress. Plus, the shorter the time between Brown's succession to power and the next general election, the less time Brown has to mess things up, and therefore the greater the chance of a Labout election victory.

    I bet you're glad you asked now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I still can't believe that there are people out there who really believe in the Adam and Eve tale.

    ReplyDelete
  4. There are people who believe cold weather makes you more susceptible to nasal infection, and there are others who believe vitamin C protects you.

    There's people who will tell you in all seriousness that the mineral impurities in tap water are harmful, but the same mineral impurities in bottled water are beneficial.

    Most people believe in evolution, but they think it involves a species becomming more beautiful and even more moral over time.

    These people aren't morons, they're just ordinary folk who heard a stupid idea repeated often while growing up, and never had great cause to question it.

    I don't think notions of a creator god, a garden of eden, and a magic apple are qualitively different from the above examples. And I don't think most people's belief in them is different.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Brilliant analysis, Kapitano! Most insightful in many ways!
    Criationism is one of the most ridiculous «things» thriving these days in the USA. I can hardly believe there are people - in THAT country - believing in such tales as guides for everything in life... It's unbelievable and scarey...
    Btw, congratulations on the precious event! :-)
    Ricardo

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes I AM glad I asked, 'cause you have a way with words.

    I understand why now, though honestly it's ludicrous. A one year course to be proficient enough to teach? Glad I'm not a student ... OK so I'm lying. I'd love to be a student again ... please, can I?

    Oh and the sites back up and all new - see what you think.

    Anonymous K who simply has to find his damn blogger logon codes. Bah. Humbug.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks for kind words kap. I've only just started reading your blog, it's quite good. I'm impressed with your insights.

    Jay and others similarly closeted make me heartsick. We can box ourselves in so needlessly. I wish I could do more to help.

    Cheers, Brian

    ReplyDelete