It is late at night, or early in the morning; I’m not certain which. On the radio Eric Clapton is preaching the blues with a conviction and articulation that goes beyond the power of words to speak of the soul…
I have been listening to music since coming home at 1:30 from MM’s home. We made love three times today, sat in her hot-tub, spent time with the kids: it was a good day. A and I went to see the Princess Diaries II, a waste of time. She enjoyed it. I found it plodding and predictable. The truth was that the “love interest” for the princess was a boy so cute I wanted to fuck him. He was pretty, beyond any reality. This juxtaposed to her - the princess’- painfully ordinary best friend. I wondered if there are any ordinary looking people that fall in love, live their lives, fail or succeed. It seems that the standard of beauty is unattainable and airbrushed. Everything revolves around what “I” want and that “I” am satisfied is all that ultimately matters. I was disturbed by the implication that puerile romance is the ultimate canon of what is “right” or “good.”
MM and I talked about loving today. I told her how I see us: we are truly in love, no doubt there. But we are also committed to each other. Love makes commitment possible; commitment gives love a ground upon which to stand. Emotions come and go, ebb and flow. If our relationship is only predicated upon how we feel it is built on feeble stuff. No, the loving makes commitment possible that frees us to love, even when love is not felt as powerfully or as presently. Commitment makes possible the trusting that loving will again flow.
The movie missed this point: It is all about how “I” feel. That whole idea seems masturbatory to me. I don’t always feel what is. I often miss what is. I am wrong much of the time. That does not make me less perceptive than most, neither does it say that my feelings are not valid. It does, however, place them in a context that allows for greater emotional stability and growth. Passion can flourish and become even greater in a context of trust. Commitment makes that possible. The truth is that I consider that MM and I are life partners. I am committed to her and I believe that she is to me.
A liked the movie, she thought it was cute. I wondered what message it sent to my daughter who stands on the brink of womanhood. What does it say about love, duty, commitment, or keeping faith? Is this the mythology that I want to form her worldview?
Now it is John Mayer playing "Any Given Thursday"… He is a gifted musician. He does not speak to my soul the same way that Clapton and the blues do…
I wonder about the idealized man in these films. He is pretty, sensitive, and ultimately weak. This character found his way – because he fell in love with the princess – but was ultimately defined by some other elder character whose nefarious agenda was too great for him to grasp. What has happened to men? There was a time when a strong man was a good thing. I don’t mean the "compensator characters" like any of Schwarzenegger or Rambo; I mean the characters that had internal struggles and moral fortitude. Theirs was a power that rested as much in their minds as their hearts: a soul that seeks what is right. I miss Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Somehow I can't imagine a real man having to be violent to prove that he's got cojones. It seems to take more guts to choose not to be violent; more inner fortitude to remain in peace and be an agent of compassion.
I think that a compassionate humanity must be a strong humanity. Compassion is a virtue of strength that can choose not to oppress or do harm. Strong people - men and women, gay and straight - have no need to hold others down. Ethnicity has no place in the conversation. All are part of one common clay, one common humanity. Strong men need to stand for intelligent compassion that is honest and visionary. The weak-willed pretty boys may make fun toys for equally weak-willed women; they are ultimately dangerous as they are prone to aggression when they learn that their balls are in a jar.
How can we live in love without commitment? How can we commit unless we have the moral fortitude and strength to dare to draw a line that defines ourselves in terms of the needs and welfare of another, creating limits that are freely embraced? I know that I could go on another sexual bender. Why would I want to? I know that I could see other women. What would that prove. I choose monogamy; hell, I embrace it joyfully. My manhood is not proven by the number of women I have penetrated. My manhood is defined by my ability to keep faith.
MM is strong, loving and wise: there is nothing sexier than an intelligent and compassionate woman whose power is expressed in loving commitment. Her beauty is greater than her mere form (which I have to say is devastatingly sexy and pleasing to the eye). She is a strong woman. She needs a strong man who sees compassion, kindness, beauty and grace as masculine virtues. I am no metro-sexual. I am not pretty. I am not easily fooled, nor do I suffer fools lightly.
But I am a strong man…
