Sunday Sermon [Fathers, Sons and Daughters]

Happy Father’s Day, mi gente,

I guess this is not your typical Father’s Day offering. Sometimes the hardest thing is to be honest with one’s self. My fathers were good, if flawed, human beings, but they gave much. I was definitely not a good father, but I tried… 

Fatherhood

My father as a young man holding me.

What have you done with the garden that was entrusted to you?

 -- Antonio Machado

I had two fathers and possibly more. I had uncles, older cousins, as well as elders from the community who were in many respects father figures. But the two that were most influential was my biological father, Edwin, and my stepfather, Vincent. They were two men who shared the lived experiences of being Puerto Rican men in a racist society. Yet, in many other aspects, they were polar opposites.

My biological father was almost all yang: penetrating intelligence, extroverted, creative, charismatic -- he was

My father Edwin

everything a little boy wanted as a father. I adored him -- worshiped the very ground he walked -- and I wanted to be just like him. My father passed on to me the gift of the love for knowledge and I could never repay him for that. My father’s example taught me that there was a higher purpose in life and he taught me love for knowledge, beauty, and truth.

My stepfather, Vincent, was almost all yin: he was easy-going, definitely not cerebral, loved doing things with his hands, and loved music. As a child, he would take me to

My stepfather Vincent

his various jobs and brag to his friends and co-workers that I was a genius. Then he would say something like, “Go ahead, ask him anything,” and his co-workers would and I would almost always get the answer right. He used to get a big kick out of that. Vincent, instead of resenting my intelligence, supported it. Any other man would’ve felt insecure, but not Vincent, because he was easy going almost to a fault. Not that he was a pushover, he wasn’t. He had the hands of a carpenter and laborer, large and rough. As a child I saw him knock out a man much bigger than him with one punch. Vincent was simply less confrontational than my father. Vincent’s example taught me dependability, consistency, or “showing up” as he might have put it.

These days it’s popular for the chattering class and politicians of all stripes to go on at length about fathers and fatherhood. On one side, there’s the myopic notion that almost all social ills can be placed firmly on the shoulders of fathers -- or “absent” fathers. Of course, this is just a form of scapegoating. Sure, fathers are important in the development of young minds, but a father being more “present” doesn’t automatically translate to a better, more just society.

I was once involved in the creation of a leadership development workshop that utilized relationship-building skills. My assumption then and still, was that the essence of

With my son, Ian, when he was around 8

leadership is about the ability to connect to people, rather than forcefully leading them by the nose. Whenever I would ask workshop participants to list what they perceived as leadership qualities, nurturing -- a core skill for relationship building-- was almost never mentioned. When our culture emphasizes bread-winning and individual success for men at the expense of care-giving, the welfare of children suffers. A father’s absence impacts our children’s development of social skills, self-esteem, and attitudes towards achievement. But more importantly, our culturally warped understanding of masculinity contributes to various forms of maladjustment, such as lack of impulse control, violence, incompetence, dependence, and irresponsibility. The son of a psychologically absent father experiences a weakened identification with what it means to be a man, and the daughter experiences a weakened relationship to the masculine principle.

Yet, in the name of family financial and psychological welfare, our legal system emphasizes the importance of the father’s job (or ability to earn), and therefore his absence. When social attitudes and norms are not supportive of the

As a boy in the Lower East Side

father’s active involvement in the family, then we see the fragmentation of family relationships so common today.

Don’t misunderstand my point: I am not advocating for some notion of bullshit “men’s rights.” We live in a patriarchal society that confers privilege on men -- especially white, heterosexual men. I am saying that we -- all of us -- need to redefine what it means to be a man. We need to redefine masculinity if we’re going to do away with oppression and violence. What I am advocating for is to take down patriarchy by redefining what it is to be a man and, by connection, what it means to be a father.

In the end, we are all flawed creatures. We all make mistakes. As for me, I would say that if you were to ask my son, he would give at best a mixed review. More likely, I don’t

During the Occupation at Wall St.

think he would characterize me as a good father. And he would have good reasons for his view. In the final analysis, I too am seriously flawed human being. I guess what is important is not to get too stuck in who’s “wrong” and who’s “right,” but to do the right thing at the right time because it is the right thing to do at that moment.

And yet my own experience leaves me with the feeling that a good father, or a good man, however that is defined, requires more than getting the task done right. Perhaps fatherhood is more about being genuine and revealing ones vulnerability to those you love. When I reflect on the relationships between fathers, sons, and daughters, I am reminded of the words of the poet Rumi: “Out beyond rightdoing and wrongdoing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there.” My son, if he chooses, will one day be a father and if he can take even a little of what my own teachers gave me, then he will be a man.

My name is Eddie and I’m in recovery from civilization…

The Friday Sex Blog [Celibacy]

Hola mi Gente,

It’s Friday! Hope you have a great weekend.

* * *

Celibacy

The only sexual perversion is celibacy.

I will submit that celibacy has become the last sexual perversion in America. Sure, medically speaking, celibacy is relatively safe, non-harmful, and carries no risk of a sexually transmitted disease. But as a former colleague who is a sex educator stated recently during a discussion of abstinence: “It’s safe, but is it sex?”

It’s an important question, more important than it may seem at first.

Essentially, celibacy is self-denial, an inhibition of sex. And as I have said repeatedly, repression is a poor substitute for morality. Furthermore, when we push sex into the darkness, it claims more power over our preconscious intentions. This is why abstinence-only sex education is an abominable failure -- it goes counter to one the most powerful of evolutionary forces. Essentially, to deny sex, is to deny your humanity.

For the purpose of this post, I will define celibacy as sexual abstinence or the state of not being married. These two dynamics are closely related. Celibacy is encouraged by various institutions namely governments and religions for different reasons.

At one time celibacy was the only recourse for women who chose not to submit to a marriage that would place them in a position of servitude. Others, out of necessity, used celibacy to protect their reputations. Conversely, those in arranged marriages took advantage of the religious suppression of sex as an excuse not to have sex with their spouse (known as agenbioisis -- a couple living together without sex). Most people chose to remain celibate during the absence of their lovers. Others chose it out of fear of intimacy or trauma resulting from being sexually abused. Many more were forced into celibacy due to a lack of available partners. This was true at one time, for example, for male Chinese immigrants in California.

Throughout history, governments have imposed celibacy on people as a way to control population, disease, and for economic reasons. the US military during WW I, for example, urged by fanatical moral reformers and concerned over the potential loss of manpower to venereal disease, encouraged the celibacy of their troops by using propaganda which portrayed sexually responsive women as spies, prostitutes, and disease carriers. Military police were stationed in areas where local women and sex workers frequented. Sexually well-adjusted and/ or responsive women came to be viewed as whores with many being arrested en masse. Ironically, those who were less responsive were viewed by the men as the spoils of war. It should go without saying that none of these attitudes resulted in a culture in which respect for women and their sexuality were valued.

Religious homosexuals who have wanted to remain in a favorable standing with their church have chosen celibacy.

Abstinence is often viewed as character building. However, it can also be seen as a form of sexual repression with definite negative consequences. The occupants of convents and monasteries were often notorious for their sadistic inclinations and, as with the accusers during the European and Salem witch-hunts, delighted in the sexual exposés of others sexual exploits. More recently, the MeeseCommission, charged with defining obscenity, resulted in the accumulation of the world’s largest repository of pornographic material. They probably had a good time.

Aside from serving as a divine justification to burn men and women like me, religious celibacy also serves of focusing the adherent’s attention on a god, looking only to Him or Her for love and approval. This may bond an individual to the church but at the same time destroys any chance they have of learning to look upon others for nurturance, support, and unconditional love/ acceptance. 

Christianity has waged an enduring and influential war against sex. In some sects, the extreme has been the norm. The eighteenth century Shakers, for example, imposed many social restrictions on themselves to avoid erotic stimulation. They weren’t allowed to have pets for fear they might mate before them, nor were they allowed to touch, speak, or walk with someone of the opposite sex.

The only form of sexual release they were allowed was that of ritual dancing (in private) which led some into an altered state of consciousness (which was why they were called “Shakers” -- they shook uncontrollably).

Others practiced celibacy as a way to achieve altered states. St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, early Christians who formed the philosophical foundations of the Catholic Church, were influenced by this manner rather than the more usual practice of self-flagellation as a means to do away with sexual feelings. St. Augustine was also the major figure involved in transforming sex from something sacred to something sinful.

The Victorians took celibacy to completely new different heights. They believed that the only justified orgasm was one that was achieved in order to propagate the species. This meant that any type of sex other than penis/ vagina was viewed as unhealthy as well as sinful. During this time, it was also believed that fellatio and cunnilingus could cause cancer and anal sex? Well, let’s just say that anal sex was the worst kind of offense. Suffice it to say that I would have been considered a heretic had I lived during Victorian times.

Certain mystics use celibacy for psychological and spiritual reasons (I totally disagree with spiritual reasons for celibacy, but that’s another post). Mystics often use celibacy to reach “higher” altered states of consciousness. Religious leaders use celibacy as a way of developing a high level of concentration.

There is no documentation on the long-term physical effects of total abstinence, but there should be a concern about the atrophying of the love muscle (the pubococcygeus), which serves to control the spasms during orgasm. There is also some evidence showing that it may not be possible for a woman to orgasm after ten or twenty years of not using this muscle properly. 

In other words, use it or lose it!

My name is Eddie and I’m in recovery from civilization…

The Friday Sex Blog [Virgins and Whores]

Hola mi Gente,

Some of you might not know, but after a lot of thinking and with even more humility, I put up a fundraising campaign on GoFundMe (here). The prospect of losing my belongings (in storage) and my cell service was what prompted this move. Mostly, my living situation has changed. Technically, I am homeless. I have been fortunate in that my sister has put me up, but I’ve been here much too long and I have absolutely no income.

So, it was with a much trepidation (and embarrassment) that I put up the page and posted it on social media. The response was immediately affirming. I mean, it wasn’t so much the financial support (some from people who hardly know me), thought that was important. What got me was people who gave so freely even when their own situations were tenuous. As an example, one person who contributed, sent me the following note:

I know you don’t know me, but I have been reading your blog for many years. I can’t tell you the times your words have had an impact on my life. Your stories and how you freely share about your life have made me think and sometimes you were the difference. I wish I could give you more…

Then there was this:

Eddie, I don't have much. I am on unpaid sick leave from work currently. But you have called me “sweetie” so many times, makes an old girl feel good!! Love you and pray your breakthrough is sooner than later!

In short, there were many messages of support like these. More than the financial support, these sentiments mean so much more to me. If you can give, it would be greatly appreciated. If you can’t, that’s OK too. You are loved… 

* * *

Virgins & Whores

Do you really have to be the ice queen intellectual or the slut whore? Isn't there some way to be both?

 -- Susan Sarandon

What men desire is a virgin who is a whore.

 -- Edward Dahlbert

 

Early Christian leaders were forced to establish the absolute purity of the mother of Christ because of their attitudes toward women. Eve had tempted Adam in the Garden of Eden and therefore women were view as vessels of sin, which was passed on to their wombs at conception. The pains of childbirth and menstruation were the curse of Eve (fuck!), and according to influential Christian saints, the closeness of women to all that is vile could be seen in the “feces and urine” of childbirth.

In comparison, Mary, who had not conceived like other women, was the second coming of Eve, put here to redeem the mistakes of the first. In many ways, Eve was the incarnate mother of humanity (whore!), Mary its spiritual mother (good girl!).

Mary would quickly become an object of worship in her own right. The first recorded prayer to the Virgin Mary dates from about 390 b.c.e.; her cult reached its height around the 16^th century. In popular worship, however, Mary may have lost her virginal status. She has often been given the attributes of pagan mother goddesses, all who came before Mary. Mary’s most striking pagan metamorphosis, however, occurs within the orthodox doctrine, because she is identified with the Church, and the Church is the bride of Christ. There, like many other goddesses that preceded her, Mary becomes the bride in an incestuous marriage with her own son. She is regarded as an ideal of perfection but the church has never used Mary to represent women, but to slut-shame them in comparison.

As the patroness of priests and guardian of their celibacy, some seminarians may still be urged to think of Mary if they have lustful thoughts, continuing a centuries-old tradition of sublimating desire in an unattainable fantasy.

Christianity has always had a love/ hate relationship with whores. At the beginning of the 16^th century Pope Julius II was said to have established a Church brothel in Rome (based on an earlier model) where the inhabitants spent their time at religious duties when they were not “working.”

To the medieval Church, unmarried women were either virgins or whores, and the cult of that other Mary, Mary Magdalene, grew alongside that of the Virgin Mary. As a prostitute (bad girl!) who was redeemed, and who eventually became a saint (good girl!), the figure of Mary Magdalene served to emphasize the equation of women to sin, while at the same time holding out the promise of salvation to those who did penance.

Magdalene is actually a conflation of at least three different biblical figures, who in the Orthodox Greek Church still have their respective feast days: Mary Magdalene herself, a woman from whom seven demons were exorcised by Jesus, and to whom he first appeared after his resurrection; Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus, who bathes Christ’s feet in ointment; and an unspecified “sinner” – not explicitly a prostitute – who bathes Christ’s feet or head in ointment in three gospels.

The image of Magdalene also became confused with that of a Mary of Egypt, who made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the 4^th century by working her passage as a ship’s prostitute. In Jerusalem, she repented and became a hermit. Throughout Christian history, many similar figures have entered the canon as, one historian wrote, “beauty consuming itself like incense burned before God in solitude far from the eyes of men became the most stirring image of penance conceivable.” I guess at the heart of all this madness is that patriarchy and religion makes for oppressive bedfellows.

My name is Eddie and I’m in recovery from civilization…