[the following is gonna make even less sense if you haven't yet read part 1 and part 2]
true to his word (and somewhat to my surprise), colin was back the following tuesday.
but unlike the shy wallflower we'd become accustomed to, this was a different boy entirely. he had a new energy about him; the tense, rounded posture was gone, he couldn't sit still and he couldn't stop smiling--he fairly radiated happiness.
turns out he'd done exactly as we'd told him, but contrary to his initial resolve, it had taken him almost the full week to nut up for it; in fact, he said, it was his fear of coming back and facing us empty-handed that had ultimately overridden his fear of rejection.
so it wasn't until the previous night that he had finally sat down with his roommate, looked him in the eye and told him that the reason he hadn't been around for the last four or five tuesday nights had nothing to do with a special project for his physics class.
"truth be told," he said, following the script we'd laid out for him, "those tuesday nights were spent in a coming-out group at the gay and lesbian center. i hope you can deal with the fact that i think i'm gay, and it won't make things weird between us."
and that was it; there was nothing in any way overtly challenging or threatening. on the contrary, we had colin put his sexuality out there as nothing more than a likely possibility; the ball would then be in the roommate's court.
and holy shit, was that ball smashed back at our boy--the way colin told it, almost before the words were out, he and the roommate were in each others' arms, kissing awkwardly, groping up and down the lengths of each others' bodies and pouring out their innermost feelings.
and turns out their stories were pretty similar: both had always known they were different, had kept that difference tightly under wraps, and had never dared to act on that knowledge--until now.
"we laid there on his bed a long time, just holding each other and kissing and talking and talking and kissing," colin said, the words pouring out of him.
i tell you, you coulda heard a pin drop in that stuffy little room.
"and then," he said, and took a deep breath before continuing, " it happened. we did it--we had sex, and it was...incredible!"
at this, everyone leaned forward expectantly--we were invested in the boy's situation, this was the payoff and we wanted a blow-by-blow, goddammit.
head back, eyes half-closed and a look of beatific joy alighting his face as he relived the memory, he told us that first they had undressed each other, and touched each other in all those special, long-forbidden places, and then . . .
and then they laid down on the roommate's bed and did pretty much what they'd done every night under the covers for months, except this time they did it together, while kissing and looking into each other's eyes, until they shot at precisely the same instant--from what i could tell, whole thing took a little less than a minute.
then--i swear to god--he said, "but don't worry, guys, we were totally safe--we used condoms and everything."
at that, having breathlessly related to us the single most transformative event of his young life, he sat back, beaming from ear to ear, and awaited our proud reaction.
and knowing my group well, i expected the room to erupt in disappointed groans at this anticlimax [that's IT?! you jacked off together? hell, that's not sex!], not to mention derisive laughter at the boy's naive notion that two lame-ass virgins needed the protection of condoms to do anything, much less that.
but for several long seconds nobody said a word--i guess they, like me, were all too busy casting back over their own catalog of myriad past hookups and conquests for even one sexual memory, no matter how elaborate and fantasy-fulfilling, that would make their own goddam faces light up like colin's just had.
and to their credit, not a single guy in that room threw out anything in the subsequent discussion that might burst his little bubble of joy.
that was the last we saw of colin (in fact, he left the meeting early because he couldn't wait to get back to his new boyfriend), but that was ok; the group had served its purpose for him, and i felt pretty good about that.
but he left us something as well: a reminder that good sex really isn't so much about such superficialities as big dicks or positions or props or drugs or even what you do as it is about where your head is--and, if you're lucky, your heart.
* * * * *
[and where is little colin today? oh, probably hanging trussed-up in a sling somewhere high on meth with electrodes clipped to his nipples and a buttplug up his ass, vainly chasing the high of that first time--but i hope not.]
cynically yet idealistically submitted for your reading pleasure,
mkf
7 comments:
After reading all three things I thought that all 3 parts raised up a few issues that reminded me exactly of the excerpt below . Specifically , the idea that they both felt they were different , about the enraptured attention of the men in the circle and the whole idea that this was a fantasy come true . As well as such behaviour being present both in 15 year olds and 50 year olds . I want to see what you think about your related experience to what this excerpt says:
Homosexuality is not adequately explained by a disturbed or detached relationship with the same-sex parent, and/or an overattachment to the opposite-sex parent, no matter how frequently these are associated with it. For one thing, such relationships are often seen in pedophiliacs as well, and in other sexual neurotics (Mohr et al. 1964, 61, 140). Moreover, there are normal heterosexuals with similar parent-child interactions. Secondly, as remarked above, neither do cross-gender behavior and interests necessarily lead to homosexuality.
Even a gender inferiority complex, however, may take various forms, and erotic fantasies flowing from it may not only be directed to young or more mature adults of the same sex, but also to children of the same sex (homosexual pedophilia), or possibly to persons of the opposite sex. The woman-chaser, for instance, often suffers from a variant of the masculinity inferiority complex. The decisive factor for homosexuality is the fantasy. And fantasy is shaped by self-image, the view of others — with regard to one’s gender qualities — and chance events, such as determinative social contacts and experiences in puberty. The gender inferiority complex is the stepping-stone to a variety of frustration-borne sexual fantasies.
Feeling less masculine or feminine as compared to same-sex peers is tantamount to the feeling of not belonging. Many prehomosexual boys had the feeling of “not belonging” with their fathers, brothers, or other boys, and prelesbian girls with their mothers, sisters or other girls. To illustrate the importance of “belonging” for gender identity and gender-conforming behavior, an observation by Green (1987) may serve. Of a pair of identical twin brothers, one became homosexual, the other heterosexual; the heterosexual was the one who bore his father’s name.
“Not belonging”, inferiority feelings, and loneliness inter-connect. Now the question is, how do these feelings lead to homosexual desires? To see through this, the notion of “inferiority complex” must be clarified.
The child and the adolescent automatically react to feelings of inferiority and “not belonging” with self-pity or self-dramatization. They inwardly perceive themselves as pathetic, pitiable, poor creatures. The word “self-dramatization” is correct, for it describes the child’s tendency to view himself as the tragic center of the world. “Nobody understands me”; “nobody loves me”; “everybody is against me”; “my life is all misery” — the young ego does not and for the most part cannot accept his sorrow, much less perceive its relativity or view it as something that will pass. The self-pity reaction is very strong, and it is easy to give way to it. For self-pity, to a degree, has a comforting effect, as does the pity one receives from other people in times of grief. Self-pity provides warmth; it consoles because there is something sweet in it. Est quaedam flere voluptus, there is a certain lust in crying, according to the ancient poet Ovid (Tristia). The child or adolescent who feels himself to be a “poor me” can become attached to this attitude, especially when he withdraws into himself and has no one to help him work through his problems with understanding, encouragement, and firmness. Self-dramatization is particularly typical in adolescence, when the young person easily feels a hero, special, unique, even in his sufferings. If the attachment to self-pity remains, then the complex proper, that is, the inferiority complex, comes into existence. In the mind, the habit of feeling like a “poor inferiority me” is fixated. It is this “poor me” within who feels unmasculine, unfeminine, alone, and “not belonging” to the peer group.
Initially, self-pity works like good medicine. Rather soon, however, it works more like a drug that enslaves. At that point, it has become — unconsciously — a habit of self-comforting, of concentrated self-love. The emotional life has become neurotic essentially: addicted to self-pity. With the child’s or adolescent’s instinctive, strong egocenteredness this proceeds automatically, unless there are affectionate and strengthening interventions from the outside world. The ego will forever remain the hurt, poor one who pities himself; it remains the same child-ego. All views, efforts, and desires of the “child of old” have been preserved in this “poor me.”
The “complex” is therefore fed by a lasting self-pity, by an inner complaining about oneself. Without this infantile (adolescent) self-pity, there is no complex. Inferiority feelings can exist temporarily, but if enduring self-pity takes root, they stay alive, often as fresh and strong when the person is fifty years old as when he was fifteen. “Complex” means that the inferiority feelings have become autonomous, recurring, always active, though more intense at some times than at others. Psychologically, the person in part remains the child or adolescent he was and no longer matures, or hardly, in the areas where the inferiority feelings reign. In homosexuals, this is the area of self-image in terms of gender characteristics and gender-related behavior.
As bearers of an inferiority complex, homosexuals are unconsciously self-pitying “adolescents.” Complaining about their psychical or physical condition, about being wrongly treated by others, about their life, fate, and environment, is typical with many of them, as well as with those who play the role of being always happy. They are as a rule not aware of their self-pity addiction. They see their complaints as justified, not as coming from a need to complain and to feel sorry for themselves. This need for misery and self-torment is peculiar. Psychologically, it is a so-called quasi-need (”Quasi-Bedurfnis“), an attachment to the pleasure of complaining and self-pity, to playing the part of the tragic one.
Acquiring insight into the central neurotic drive of complaining and inner self-pity is sometimes difficult for therapists and others seeking to help homosexual persons. More often than not, those who have heard about the self-pity concept think it a little far-fetched to assume that unconscious infantile self-pity could be that basic to homosexuality. What is generally remembered and agreed on concerning this explanation is the notion of “feelings of inferiority”, not that of “self-pity.” The perception of the paramount role of infantile self-pity in neurosis and homosexuality is indeed new; perhaps strange at first glance. but if thought over and checked against personal observations it proves extremely enlightening
excerpt from Aardweg, G. (1997). The Battle for Normality: A Guide for (Self-)Therapy for Homosexuality.
yeah, i keep wishin for the day when YOUR head is in the right place again..
But, fuck it.. i'll settle for your heart..
You told such a good story. Congrats on that.
So ole' Colin found love just gently kissing and exploring and whatnot and now, 15 years later, has probably just done his first crack pipe hit of crystal for the LONG weekend and is lubing up his ass for a fisting session. Is that what you think?
I would still prefer to remember Colin as the young man having a fantasy come true for the very first time and how he beamed from ear to ear with amazing happiness.
'Cause I remember my real 'first' time and how I had the most amazing orgasm. And I was chasing that for years.
I found it again (and actually even better), but it took years.
I can now look back upon my first time just as warmly and as happily as when you think of John and the amazing courage you showed in getting in his sleeping bag and announcing to all of your 'friends' that had known you for years that Mike the moody and unhappy architect was actually Mike, the gay moody and unhappy architect.
bb: i read your comment a couple times, and what i got from it was the following: mr. aardweg bases his thesis on the belief that male (because he doesn't venture into the female variety) homosexuality arises from the root of a sense of male inferiority which leads to a desire to be like like the prototypical superior male which morphs into a sexual desire for same which is cemented into permanence by the emotion of "why me" self-pity--a nice, neat theory, indeed.
in fact, it reminds me of the "fags are fags because they had distant fathers" theory.
problem with both of these theories is...
[i'll tell you the problems tomorrow night--it's late and i'm a little drunk and it's time for bed]
[and this goes double for you, noblesavage (and as for yhm, i've already replied privately to you).
no love for the Judi?
Oh yeah...forgot to weigh in.
Innocence is so brilliantly amazing sometimes. I hope Colin retained some of that, I truly do.
=continuation of previous comment=
here's the thing, bb--the "cause" in each of these theories could just as easily be the effect.
consider: while it's easy to assume that fags become fags because their fathers were distant, what if the opposite were true; i.e., fags' fathers became distant because they instinctively realized early on that their sons were "different" and therefore they couldn't give them what they needed? what if that were true, cupcake?
similarly, what if--rather than the the boys in your psychologist's model becoming "gay" as a result of their feelings of male inadequacy--those boys, conversely (and naturally), felt inadequate as males because they were inherently homesexual?
this is the theory i lean toward, babe--and not only because it's the one that pleases me more, but because it's the one that's supported by recent scientific evidence (i.e., demonstrable hormonal and physiological differences between gay and straight males).
noblesavage: thanks for that; i actually liked this one, too--and if you've really managed to override all the damaging influences that impinged on your sexuality between that first time and now, then i tip my hat to you.
oh, and judi: believe it or not--and even though i'm an agnostic and all--i say a little prayer for colin from time to time.
Post a Comment