Girl Blue

Girl turned blue. What did she do?

No I will not attempt to type some elementary rhyme to mention not her hue, but her demeanor. The girl has turned blue.

In a constant to remain hopeful of something to intrigue her mind. What is it? A longing for that star since burnt out beyond her years of existence. She longs to find the other side of the universe. Or perhaps to find that time and space are part of a continuum without a clear beginning or ending. 

How do we imagine the beginning, before the universe as we are becoming to know? A white empty space. How do we imagine the end? A seemingly spontaneous unfortunate event were the moon collapsed and had fallen onto Earth. More accurately, when our star has past its time into death. May we be dragged into the pit. Frightful, panicky, perhaps already extinct. 

This girl is blue because she is unconcerned with what the mundane world, society and life may offer her. There isnt a thing at all imaginative about that relationship to materials; jobs to purchase materials; people around another to reveal, compare, and to relate about materials. 

What is imaginative, inspiring to write what no one would ever be able to read: her trip to visit the stars. A journal of isolationism, omnipotence written for her. A letter to herself in the past about her being so blue. 

She’s lost interest in this mundane world. At some point attempted to reconnect. Only to find the pointlessness of it all. She lost all hope of finding a common understanding in all aspects of appreciating another. Then a slight advice from a concerned spirit raised her interest to rekindle what was lost in the form of communication. What she had found instead was the same, the mundane. Lonely as ever walking through life gazing up and around. Those around staring at someone quite strange, or as some one to take precautionary measures of… she walked alone. 

No one else to understand who she is and why she may appear with her eyes dark and face wet. A polite smile to strangers that walk by in judgement of her. 

How else does she imagine isolation? Oh so much so wanting an unfortunate event to take place where she is then left stranded. On an island that she will not assume possession of, a claim of discovery, and never will deface the nature. What does she imagine? To sit alone on the beach and to stare out at blue. To walk slowly, to feel the sand beneath her toes. She oh so want to feel the deafening silence of loneliness. 

To sit and wait for the sky to turn orange, red, then to turn black. We’ve rotated away to face the moon. She looks up again and imagine the night sky grabbing hold of her body. Shred her being apart so that only in essence does her mind and vision exist. Traveling throughout space to experience the evolutionary happening of possible new beginnings of life-too curious about their purpose. 

To float, no, actually to fall into space forever a wanderer who has lost all sense of contentment. No longer a person, without a pronoun to describe the body’s physicality in a sense. This life falls forever into space for eternity. A blue phenomenon receptive of every other element that extends beyond the universe that was known in the previous history.  

The imagination is extended to spontaneous energy forming to conduct a strike on the blue phenomenon. Hurt in a way, how to rejuvenate in this vastness? As in the previous history, to find a source of energy, perhaps a comet. No cosmic rays existing as natural sources of energy. The blue phenomenon latching on again. The uncoordinated destination is Earth.

Dead stars become blurred, new formations become seemingly rapid. A color of blanketed clouds, or as it seems in a stand still. Swirls of light, color, pressure all around. The blue phenomenon overwhelmed. Snatched and sling forward, thrown from its attachment, declining back down to Earth at an ever increasing speed.

The girl wakes from her trance. Where is she? ‘She’ is I, and I am here walking past hotels. Sitting alone at a table abandoned somewhere that was once something. I am she dozing off thinking of an island with the sky reflecting the ocean blue. This is me, my upset, my longing and so forth. A life lived in the present has nothing to offer for a curious star gazer.

 Writing A Book

To know how to read the student is taught to write. To know how to write the student is taught to read. 

The basics of the stroke of a crayon, pencil or pen in our early years tells us how to properly begin the story. They start with the article ‘The’. 

‘The boy’ as the subject. 

‘The boy ran’ as the subject doing something, in this instance [always] going somewhere in a forward direction.

‘The boy ran home’ as the subject going somewhere thought to be pleasant. 

The students are asked to write a forward thought as well. Why is the boy going somewhere pleasant? Is he anticipating something? Yes, he is anticipating to play, to eat, to do whatever that kid is concerned with more so than the lesson. Or so one may think as we were kids once but never overanalyzing kid-like thoughts. 

That’s the basic of how to write stories, and we continued to write stories that way until told otherwise. Or until told that the subject is someone else imagined. 
I’m typing this, rather, to explain my short trip to the bookstore. There I go to scan thoughts, phrases and ideas to soak in and to practice on my own. As well as I’m there I am always to read the preface, introduction or the very first chapter or sentence of the first or second paragraph of a thought. In those ‘firsts’ I gather the subject that the writer is to expound upon. As well, how the writer introduces the subject. 

I have come across that great stories or stories that are to mimic those that are great-it’s alright the first article ‘The’ was writen once before in billions of writings-begin either with a scene doing something or a person or thing doing something within the scene. 

For instance, the scene set in the time of marshes, raindrops left on the petals over night and fog is telling the story of a fantasy, of a crime or of horror. Some great writers write this scene to tell something about nature. What is its overall significance to the subject, the plot, or even the conclusion? Does this scene have meaning or is it simply the beginning? That all depends on how the writer describes the scene and how the writer writes-specific or overly detailed. Most importantly how well the writer may write.

The second instance being that the subject is either thinking, speaking, or the writer is speaking of the subject. Toni Morrison writes a poetic version of the writer speaking of the subject’s scene and viewpoint. Others like George R.R. Martin may write of a fantasy subject thinking then to explain why that subject thinks that way. Who knows what a ‘warg’ is and may do besides him? It’s the way in which the writer describes the subject that may captivate the audience to read more. 

The ability to imagine too, to identify with the subject or scene allows the reader to continue reading.

There requires no sophistication in word choice as the Victorian writers. There requires no complexities in sentencing structures, just the ability to connect with the reader. The ability to describe in a way that captivates your audience. 

The story simply has to be interesting to the imagination, intriguing to the mind. 

On Dating A Narcissist

I have had unsuccessful immature relationships so far in life, and so far into my adult life. I have yet to experience a relationship whereby the person has not said, towards the end of it all, that we are ‘two different people’. In my mind this is plainly obvious that we are two different people. I do not understand by the key break up line-that concludes every relationship that I have had-that we are too different to be together for an indefinite amount of time. Here, I’m thinking these geniuses are truly and remarkably blind. How did you not know that, in the beginning, I preferred talking insistently about abstract ideas and of society, whereas you preferred the behaviors in the expression of love [i.e. cuddling]? How did you not know that my version of relaxation is to nap and to sustain knowledge on various subjects at once, whereas you wanted to go outside for play? How did you not know that I prefer meaningful and thought-provoking conversations, whereas you assumed I required frequent responses of infatuation and laughter? I was certainly aware of such differences and of others more personal. Why are you only aware towards the end of it all? Or, a better question here, why do you assume that awareness of differences is a sign that we are a mismatch, or too imperfect to remain as a couple?

Some people tend to assume that true companionship is with a person that complements in a way that they are ‘twins’. They are the exact copy of the other. They are the reflection in the mirror that they wake up to and either reluctantly stare or smile. I cannot bear the thought of being with someone that is the reflection of me. Not that I do not love myself. However, if I am to want someone that is the exact version of myself or somewhat similar then I rather be single. Why take on an extra bill for takeout dinner, or to purchase matching outfits for my personality doppelgänger, when I can do so cheaply and alone? What satisfaction is there, for myself, if I am constantly surrounded by my own mindset, beliefs and ideas when my personality craves for different opinions and intellectual arguments? I enjoy the debate between individuals, preferably with someone who is different. Now my character, my personality resembles that of the Carl Jung/Myers-Briggs personality type INTP. I do not give much weight to astrology or personality typing, however I find it very helpful to explain my nature and character-which is considered odd and rare to most people. As I crave intellectual stimulation, I have been accused of wanting someone who is of that exact type. I have been accused of, towards the end of a relationship, of being a narcissist. Why is that? I insisted on doing something that is of my character to do. Howlever they are mistaken. I wish to create meaningful conversations with people regardless if it is of their nature or character to argue. I wish to engage their minds, of their thoughts and opinions on various abstract thought or of society. This person need not to have a preference for doing so, as I find arguments or any sign of disagreement scares people. I crave different experiences from those of different backgrounds, so that I may better understand the greater subject of humanity. If I had some exactly like myself we would write a book together. While that is all fine and anticipated for future collaboration, I have not gained nothing more with someone who simply wish to analyze and to retain as well.

Do opposites attract then? According to the article, ‘The Science of Narcissism: Why We Really Just Want to Date Ourselves’, relationship ‘twining’ or a person wanting a complement is greatly desired. As a side note here, I will reference the article that first presented the idea from my original search. Then I will follow the links provided by the author in order to find the original topic or study published. I have found that Business Insider will have authors linking to a previous Business Insider article- for more views I suppose. The original article cited included a study about how humans, as all animals, tend to have or to seek partners that bear similarities to their parents. The comparison used was the hair color and the eye color of the person’s partner compared to their parents. The study claims that there is a form of genetic imprinting that conditions us to continue a preference for certain genes. This may be the case for basic, instinctive tribal survival. However, in a more modern world I would see that this is more of a cultural familiarity or preference due to some perceived ideological necessity. For example, the black activist that insist that interracial dating is futile to the radical and never-ending upset nature of one. And since this study indicates a bias towards heterosexuals or those that engage in opposite-sex attraction more so than others, I find the study to have little understanding of human attraction.

But can opposites attract then? According to several articles, though one I’ll site here: ‘Attracted to Your Opposite?, people do prefer their ‘twin’. This is a chemical balance that we are unable to detect, but are sure to know when we find someone exactly like ourselves. Essentially, if you like something, then you like what you like and will seek out that likeness in someone else. While others enjoy a reflection of themselves in others, there are those that are truly attracted to opposites. This is to say that everyone loves differently and in regardless of their reason. The point that I agree with is concluded within the article about the subject of love. It is concise-love is ‘the simple ability to overlook everything you cannot stand in someone’. I have experienced that precise point. To be aware of such differences, but to make it work  regardless because that is love.

So They Believe

Religious affiliations account for just about 88% of our global population, while only 16.3% are unaffiliated to any religion. That is about 9…hold on midnight mental math at work here “6 and 8 is 4…9, 10?” According to a published 2012 Pew Research on the global religious population, the vast majority affiliate to a religion largely identified or not. In contrast, a minority identify as ‘nones’. I skimmed past an article once that used the word ‘nones’ to describe atheist, agnostics, anti-theist, etc. people that were too shy for labels. Anyway, to what I am to convey in anticipated long-winded paragraphs. It fascinates me, still, that we have human beings- in the existence of a modern world- that still believe in a higher power and the second coming of a rewarding death [or new life]. They still believe that the answers to human suffering is a clasped hand in prayer, a hymn, a meditation, a song, etc. Humans still build these great small, yet significant, buildings for collaborative prayer and community involvement. I am in awe here, just how influential these religions are to many others, whether they accepted as a child or grew to become devout. In fascination, in awe, since this is a modern world where unanswerable questions have been answered. A modern world where we can actively prove, scientifically, the truthiness of an extraordinary claim. And yet people still believe.

I will have to limit this essay to those most likely to have access to education beyond traditional means. That means most likely to have access to information to educate oneself or to be educated about religions, their history and impact on the world and of other scientific pursuits and ideas. Specifically I will refer to a nation and religious majority that I am most familiar with-that being the United States of America. A nation where the vast majority are Christian at 70% and are aging. A comparative study conducted by the Pew Research Center has found that while affiliation to religion, Christianity specifically, remains high the numbers are in slow decline. We are witnessing more so now a population of people, growing, and while still young, either unsure or sure about the religious claims by the Christian faith. We are slowly witnessing a population of youth questioning the existence and the purpose of a higher being. I find that too fascinating, since I am part of the young sure and labeled as an atheist. Here I am not concerned by those who challenge religion on it’s grounds. Instead I am here to write about what keeps a modern population religiously devoted to what we now know, regardless if it is acknowledged, to be human-created and constructed. What I have summarized is despite the wide access to information and education about religion, there are some inalienable uses for it still.

For Comfort

I have found that religion is useful for comfort and is familiarly useful for comfort. There is a quote posted and shared somewhere on social media that essentially stated that as an atheist we have no traditional means for comfort. That is, when confronted with the idea of existential crisis and of life existence we are left to understand then to accept alone. As an atheist I have been faced with the idea of our exact purpose based on the history and scientific understanding of our development. We are simply the product of a star born in space. Along with that we are one of many genetically similar DNA copies of one another, or we are no more special than another. Expand this scope to our solar system. Our planet is one of many planets.

View From Mars

Our solar system is one out of 100 billion or so within our galaxy. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is one out of 200 billion galaxies multiplied by 10, within our observable universe. And how many universes are there? This has yet to have been discovered, so we play with the idea through science fiction. My personal favorite to date being Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987-1994), an anticipated future essay. As my astronomy professor demonstrated-on the free activity field on campus, we are truly insignificant. And I remember feeling truly insignificant as a child as I became more sure of being a ‘nones’, an atheist rather. How did I cope with this profound discovery? In regards to our insignificance: I am glad to be a part of the age and time where technology, technological advancement, scientific research and more scientific questions are being asked about our existence and beyond that we can only imagine. I do not think we serve a greater purpose on Earth, as I think we are just as other animals and creatures, though more advanced or better able to be curious and to be aware. This greatly differs from the religious as they are told to believe that their existence is significant, and more importantly, significant to some higher being that exceeds the basic human form.

In conversation with my family, they often tell me in some variation that ‘I know that for whatever obstacles are thrown at me, God is there with me and I know it’. In their minds their purpose lies within their belief of significance. They believe that they are significant, and of course able to adapt to the Sun being the center and that there are other planets. They believe that their God created them, and placed them on Earth that is bountiful with resources. And in return they give their devotion and obedience to their creator, their father and God as a form of appreciation of this gift. Therefore, whenever they have issues with existence itself, or ‘is this all there is to life and living’. They were taught to believe that Earth is simply a test for his people. Or that the reward for their living a sin-free life is to meet Jesus Christ, God’s son, in heaven by death. Then ultimately, those who have the chance to witness such an extraordinary event, the rapture then will allow God’s believers to ascend into heaven. By this belief they live their life relatively without anxiety of greater questions. Religion proves as a greater sense of comfort in dealing with mundane details of human life as well. That being dealing with emotions of love or in dealing with a crisis. Their belief still proves as a safety net for whenever life for presents itself.

As I have felt some devastations, disappointments in life, my family thinks to comfort me with their religious thought. They tell me, ‘in this world you have to believe in something and that don’t have to be what believe, but something’. They tell me this because I will face obstacles in occupations, lifestyles, living arrangements, relationships and the like. They tell me that they are able to endure all of this because they know that ‘God is always looking out for me’. The message does not offend me, instead I subtract the religious dogma and take the already understood lesson for what it is exactly. Religion does help, in a way to provide an ease of comfort whenever life becomes overbearing. What is harmful in believing that if you had to skip a bill payment on a necessary utility that the landlord became forgiving because of God? Well you have just disregarded the kindness of an individual as being dictated by a higher power. Therefore, meaning that an individual is no more responsible for their self and actions than you are for a skipped payment. However, this is comforting to you that God is watching you and that he loves and cares for you. And despite all else you have God. Praise Him, Praise Him, Praise Him! 

Religion as a form of coping mechanism for the greater anxieties of existence, and of mundane details of human made obstacles and emotions is also out of familiarity. How do we learn how to comfort ourself or to comfort one another? Well we saw or grandmother praying once, perhaps asked ‘why does she pray?’ We see our parents in church singing and dancing about. We see a congregation of perceived happiness in the church, house of God and prayer. And others may ask how does one go through life knowing of the anxieties and obstacles that came with it? There is a song titled It’s the God In Me to illustrate that response. People use religion as means of comfort because it is familiar. It is what they were taught indirectly or not in how to cope with life. It is what they were told when they ask another person seeming to have their life in order, or not so much, or at all. So they continue to believe, and to believe for comfort.

For a Moral Ground

Atheist are often criticized as those being without a moral foundation. We may be asked often, if we so reveal ourselves, how do we determine right from wrong? Albert Einstein stated best:

“If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed”

Basically, I know to treat my fellow human with kindness. Or that if I see you are either able-bodied or not, young or old, gender being unimportant I will still hold the door for you. If I see that you are homeless, or not even, we all struggle with money trouble from time to time, I will give you cash if I have it. I will give you a car ride from and to your destination free of charge. I will volunteer my time by picking up and beautifying the community. I will donate food, donate clothes and choose for those in need. I will thank you when you are kind whether in silence or not. I’m that driver that allows other cars through and in front, if I can, when turning into a lane or turning out of a drive way. I’m that restaurant manager that will give a free meal. I made my point well and clear in that aspect. As well, I know not to kill and that war is senseless, wasteful and destructive. I understand, too that suffering is not kindness; or that brain death should not be sustained. I have morals and I know right from wrong based on how I would wish to be treated and simply, it’s humanely right. I do not require a religion to tell me so, but others, many others do.

We may disagree on what is considered moral and what is not, as some tenets of faith are the product of previous archaic human biases and ignorance [i.e. homosexuality deemed as amoral]. However in some acts of kindness and views on violence there are some commonality or agreement that this concept or that action is either wrong or right. There are examples of kindness that Christians may live by example. Of course, as I stated, I will do good for those in need too. Though I do not require a verse within a book to tell me so, I understand that a Christian may so require that guidance. This is assuming that all Christians in fact read their holy text, as I find many within my own circle of influence do not and have not. So I then ask in return, how do you know what is moral and what is not when you do not ever read your holy text that tells you so. Their answer lies within their name. They are Christian and they were taught vaguely that Christian means kindness, forgiveness, minimalism, and friendship to likeminded good Christians. So they are good to others because they were taught that is where morals are founded.

Because it is Tradition

Based on the number of Christians there are in the United States- just as the numbers there are for Islam in middle eastern countries-we know they believe based on circumstances of birth. This means that you are more likely to claim a religion that is familiar, or that you were raised to affiliate with, based entirely on where you were born. If your community is Christian and Baptist, then your parents are the product of that community, therefore your faith was already predetermined before birth. This includes those adults that find religion without exposure while young, or with limited exposure; I’m sure many of you still chose Christianity. Of course there are outliers, or those that believe in a different religion entirely as adults. This is why I indicated ‘many’, as I am too an outlier, however, chose not to believe in all of the above. The same aforementioned Pew Research studies are finding that many Christians are simply Christian in name only. As in they identify as Christians because their parents were, and then their parents were before then. You see they may vaguely claim to believe in the Christian god in the face of others, but there is no strength to their testament. They cannot tell you a Bible verse, or know that there are many versions of the Bible. They may very well spout something that is not stated within their faith if their politics and comforts are challenged. I’m referring to the people that retorted ‘hate the sin but love the sinner’ fervently during the debates of allowing same-sex marriage, or marriage equality legally and nationally. They are Christian because that is what their community has identified as for decades. In a way they are still believers because they have not challenged what they do not know or care to know. Instead they are the type of apathetic believers in a sense that they will believe for paradise.

If you are one those that believe because it is tradition, you do intrigue me as well. Because the stepping point of you becoming either devoutly religious or ‘nones’ is a simple interest in all that I have typed here. It is with these interests that we are finding a steady, yet slow decline in believers. Only one Google search away, only a page within a chapter to read-whichever you may choose.

On Authority: The Significance of One’s Word Over Another

Whenever we discuss the plight of the black community-the issues that plague black communities, and the youth not yet inspired-there is an echo chamber of a singular voice speaking for all. And here I ask, why? We are to assume that in opposition or in question of these thinkers, preachers, intellectuals is the black conservative. The discussion then is no different than the “arguments”  between Booker T. Washington and W.E.B Dubois, who were both speaking of two truths over one topic. As we are to understand, and to believe that, black thought on privilege, poverty, education, wealth, criminality, law enforcement, activism, etc. is a debate between the black democrat and the black conservative. However, where the black democrat is the only valid, and sensitive voice of authority on these subjects. Why? The black democrat blames the hardships on the government, on predominately white institutions, on the history of white privilege and the privilege of the white youth. And because some of them, perhaps many of them have lived these experiences. Whereas the black conservative blames the hardships on lack of self constraints, finanaical irresponsibility and the criminality of the black youth engaging in self destructive activities. And because some of them, perhaps many of them have lived these experiences. 

Where do I stand? I stand between them, telling that they are speaking of two truths on the same topic. Where no singular thought is weighted more than another. 

Though where is my authority? Whenever I give my unwarranted opinion on these matters, yet informed, I’m considered the black conservative. Where ever I call upon myself to offer an alternative viewpoint, my thoughts are told to be less valid as the white people agree with me. If I ever point out the blatant racism displayed by a black person who is assumed to have authority on the subject of racism and privilege, I am told “racism = power”. If I ever challenge the viewpoints of the accepted majority, the black democrats, I am the puppet controlled by whites who wish to keep black people complacent. 

Though who am I and where does my politics stand? Politically I am a moderate social liberal. As far as my education is concerned, I have always been interested in studying racism. Specifically,  all aspects dealing with American (North and South) slavery. As for subjects on education and crime, I call upon my personal experience and observations. For what I am not familiar with I call upon facts and verifiable sources, without the emotional appeal that is often praised in black thought. However, who am I? As in the minds of others? A person easily disregarded by the majority as the ‘lite’ black conservative. 

As I embark on my writing journey I will discuss the topics most concerning the modern black community. Most certainly my authority will be questioned and disregarded. Though I’m open to the challenge, because it is refreshing to read the thoughts of someone equally knowledgeable, yet different.