*You walk through a door, what do you see?*

in freewrite •  last year 

I took my dog for his round-the-neighborhood-walk while the sun is out. I noticed one of my exes truck is parked in front of a blue house on Lexington, saw him busy with hand-sander just inside a chartreuse painted door. He didn’t notice me and I hadn’t walked through the door, so even though I saw him, I continued on, made the route round and on the way back I did wave and we talked a briefly about a non-profit theater & music place he’s being goaded by local art's people to manage.

I let him know I think it’s a great idea and one in which he won’t have to strain his aging body as much of his construction contractor work is—a transition he’d mentioned before. I told him I’d be the doorman the same as I sometimes do at another downtown venue, for free admission, forty under the table and a drink to sip.

He’d keep me in mind.

I walked through my own front door, took off the dogs’ red leash and saw my phone, picked up, got the vibratory indicator of recent action and saw I had eight new text messages! One from another ex who is showing me he can relate in my language after his own language in which he says, “I committed emotional murder of our relationship.”

There are always, for all of us, feathers and crows.

My sister has sent the other seven, she and her most recent man “Bible bashing” one another, using scriptural texts in their projections, nailing one another with what they’ve been nailed, many doors removed, Aldous Huxley’s admonition, the Doors of Perception might work better? For where is a door of perfection in the evils of capitalized, fundamentalized truths?

There seems this constant talk now of empaths and narcissists and when I Googled to find any academic treatise on how we might recognize and map our own flipping experiences in the gazing of our beauty in crystal-cleared pools and then seeing the other embarrassingly making kissy faces in the mirror I found nothing. A difficult search, needle in the haystack of thousands of Huffington Post articles on the ten danger signs of attempting any closeness with one of these monsters and how you must proceed, do x, y and z to step away, close a door and heal, but under no circumstances turn and open that door that shows, hey, this is the same house!

Yes, perhaps there are those who are more empathetic and those who look out only for numero uno, but don’t we both, at times, espouse these traits? Believing that we know what is best in our relationships? Taking the easy, McDonald’s, kick-him-to-the-curb approach? I’m not saying we can’t put in our best efforts and still fail and have to call it quits (believe me, I’ve done it a number of times), but what about those from our parents’ generation, that just said what happens behind closed doors is our own business and that “making it” wasn’t as much a choice, but a solid commitment, taking turns fucking and being fucked, lifting and being lifted, in shadow and light, in sickness and health, looking in, or out, of our doors?


Photo credit: Alexander Milo/unsplash

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

So much here. And I do think that our parent's generation made it because they didn't see another way.

And then again, the idea of this monogamous marriage that lasts forever is fairly new - especially the idea that the partners should fulfill all each other's needs...

I know. Really was an exploration, perhaps an argument among those different voices/desires/realities/socialization's which exist in my own psyche.
I understand the idea of impossibility in being fulfilled in all ways by another, but in my mind, I would be lying if I said I wouldn't like to find another who believes similarly and that some things do belong and flourish just b/n the two.
After all, if I can do it, why can't another?

True - and you might find it. Those kinds of relationships do exist. But I do believe that they take a lot of work - or willingness to work with each other to last for a long time.

I'm a very hard worker ;)

@mariannewest, that is so good you mention that. It's a contradiction between our roots as Christians (even when we do not believe in the figure God but we are still very much influenced by the christian doctrine) and our ancestral pagan heritage. The wife struggles with the witch :) - I actually like them both.

Two such distinctive divergences from Western standards are the cultures of the Khasi and the Na people. The Khasi are a North Indian culture of several hundred thousand people who are characterized as a matriarchal and matrilineal society ... . Property (generally owned by the women) passes to the youngest daughter, who is also responsible for the family at large – a far cry from Western societies. The Na people of Northeast China are characterized – as the anthropological report is aptly titled – as a society without fathers ... . The Na are farmers in the Himalayan region; they live without the institution of marriage. Na brothers and sisters live together their entire lives, raising the women’s children. Since, like other societies, the Na respect the incest prohibition, they practice a system of furtive or conspicuous night visits during which a man goes to a woman’s home. So much for claims of the interest of males in the propagation of their genes, i.e. parent certainty. The Na are a counter example to the claim that men have “evolved solutions to the problem of paternity uncertainty: desire for chastity, desire for sexual fidelity, and abhorrence of promiscuity in a long-term mate”

source: https://escholarship.org/content/qt1s43k5g9/qt1s43k5g9.pdf

I am glad that you are pointing out the Christian roots. So many people believe that our idea of marriage, especially the argument that marriage is between one man and one woman, is based on the bible. While it is true that the bible is a representation of a patriarchic society, the model, if any, was polygamy. Also, the idea of faithfulness and celibacy for the clergy was introduced just a few hundred years ago.
Marriage was a clear contract to protect property and had little to do with expressions of sexuality. And even once faithfulness and until death does us part was introduced, just by the nature of the times (lots of people died - especially women during childbirth) the average commitment was about 10 years...

And thanks for the info about the Na. I had heard about them and forgotten ...

You are welcome. Thanks for replying.

I do find the commitment "a life long" insofar reasonable as the circumstances in communities made this necessary or still do so.

Na brothers and sisters live together their entire lives, raising the women’s children

Same was, like you point that out, in historical times the case. That humans attached some cultural and even deeper meanings to that commitment I actually do like. In order to not only emphasize what is needed but also what one connects spiritually to it. Without being overly excited about it. Don't know if you catch what I want to say ...

Also, the expression of "brothers and sisters" keeps a distance in a good way towards the characteristics of marriage and points more towards a community of people, as we humans could see ourselves as brothers and sisters without blood bounds. Same with children.

Celibacy, actually, I find really interesting as an idea to keep away from worldly matters (having no sexual relationships, no competition in mating matters, etc.) to educate oneself and learn about the teachings of ethics. It acts as a counterpart to average life. I refer to the Buddhist monks and nuns who also do not possess any money. The pureness of the one place contrasts the impurity of another place.

Of course, celibacy does not make sense when a celestial person possesses worldly goods and treasures. Which then must be protected from stealing and which financial resources one must spend a lot of time with to manage and distribute them. These are actually deeply worldly matters and more so economics. This is probably one of the bad images the institutions of churches carry and what else is connected to their history as well.

I like to integrate my christian heritage and keep looking what else is in the world as well. What is also said through religion is not to the worst when I keep searching for the stuff which supports me in loving myself and others.

... Well, that got long. :)

Long but good. I agree that keeping a community is very important and making assumptions from your name - you are in Germany where I think communities are still more intact than here in the States. Or maybe that is just my perception from growing up in a small town there and when I go back, so many people are still there...

celibacy as a personal choice - fine. As a requirement - terrible idea as we see with all the scandals the Catholic church is dealing with right now.

I am going to stop now 😄 have to get a couple of things done. But nice talking to you

Solid. There is much to speak of...

Thank you!

This is an amazing insightful piece. Ironically, I consider myself an empath. I was married for 20 years to a full-blown narcissist. My current bow, Jeff, is an empath, too. The difference is indeed night and day. Thank you for the read and this little piece is something new for me and I fully enjoyed it.

There are always, for all of us, feathers and crows.

Thank you, @wandrnrose. Makes me glad what I write is something new for you :) And, as always, thank you for taking the time and stopping by.

I always enjoy your wonderful writing! My pleasure!

Posted using Partiko Android

@wandrnrose7, good for you - escaping a narcissist!! Too few women (and men) accomplish this!
Funny, the same line leaped out at me as a quotable quote - There are always, for all of us, feathers and crows.
I've enjoyed meeting you and @kimberlylane via #freewrite!

Thank you and it's a pleasure meeting you!

Interesting questions you raise. My mom's generation takes "til death us do part" very seriously, but women who "submit" tend to forget the part where husbands are to treasure, honor, love, and care for their wives (Mom married at age 18 in 1955, which was the norm). Yes, she took a vow, for better or worse, but he took a vow too, and when "worse" turns into "abusive," it's time to re-examine this notion of accepting one's lot in life.

I saw that HuffPo article on narcissists. Once married to a controlling, selfish, thoughtless, unfeeling, but all too often charming, charismatic and handsome narcissist, a woman will spend the rest of her life trying to escape his hold over her. (Too many women I know in real life are stuck and refuse to claw their way out of the trap.)