If Verne Troyer Can Get Laid. . .

I was going to make this my new response to every friend who complains to me about their lackluster sex life. I was going to keep it as a mantra in my head since as you all know, given that I’ve spilled my aching guts here more than once, my own sex life is nothing to wax erotic over.

It’s too easy, though, to think the way a normal person thinks. To call upon the romantic ideals of the middle-class and see love and lust behind every thrust and moan. Sometimes a gyration is just a gyration, and a tongue is just a tongue. Sometimes people, including some pretty nice looking ones, put out for reasons that have nothing to do with the laws of attraction.

Fame, even one grainy speck of it, seems to act as an aphrodisiac. Somehow sleeping with a hairy, three-eyed hunchback is less repulsive if that hunchback has appeared in the National Enquirer, drunkenly pissed in a corner, or otherwise flaunted their fucked-upness in front of millions of people.

Others may ponder the perversity of humping a freakish celebrity little person and making a sex tape of the debacle, but I can’t help but see a broader, more positive issue here for us middle-class mensches.

I mean, c’mon people! If Verne Troyer can get laid. . .

Doesn’t this negate the whole meaning of impossible? Doesn’t it just turn the hollow thud of pipe dreams into a virtual waterslide of hope?

Maybe there really can be world peace. . .
Maybe there really will be a Democratic dream ticket.
Maybe Starbucks will bring back the Coconut Mocha Frappacino just for Tod,
and my friend Neil will live happily ever after with Sophia.

Maybe I really can make that paycheck stretch into next month. Maybe Trader Joe’s will open in my neighborhood. Hell, while I’m dreaming large. . .

Maybe there really will be a Mac Powerbook in my future. A small house by the beach, and a puppy that doesn’t hump his fleece toys at every opportunity. Maybe time will stop for about a year and let me finish at least 40 of the things I’ve started. Maybe I’ll learn the difference between sincerity and placation. Maybe chocolate really can be part of a balanced diet, and that cute girl at the bookstore won’t end up being an ex-cult member, reptile collector, or straight Republican!

And we don’t even have to be famous to realize our dreams! No, because in our little perverse world, there was no rational reason Verne Troyer got laid. If Vern were a leprechaun sitting on a pot of gold and boxes of Godiva, pulling a steady stream of pearls and diamonds out of his little ass, chances are 1001% that he would not get laid. The fact that he did only proves that the world makes no sense. And in a senseless world, no dream – no matter how unattainable our rational minds once thought they were – is off limits.

We, the everyday people, can skip fame, and all the paranoia and suspicion that goes with it. We’ll never have to worry, even at the heights of our dubious successes, if we are some vapid, attention-starved woman’s Verne Troyer. We’ll never have to feel dumb for mistaking that hand in our pocket for a romantic gesture. Best of all, we won’t have to suffer the humiliation of seeing our hard-wrought, sweating sex tapes in the dollar bin, where they’ll be sought after only by poverty stricken perverts and those looking for a gag gift.

Instead, when hope fails us and our dreams seem far away — when we’re reaching for the stars and ending up with palms full of pigeon shit — we only have to remember that Verne Troyer, drunken little person and sleepwalking pisser, got laid.

Now really, don’t your own dreams suddenly feel a little more obtainable?

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Their Eyes Were Watching American Idol

I understand, from what friends and others tell me, that I was supposed to outgrow this stage, the same way I outgrew believing in the tooth fairy, a benevolent God, or that whole “it’s what’s inside that really counts” deception. Maybe there was supposed to be a revealing shock somewhere along the way — similar to the shock of seeing my eldest sister put a dime under my pillow, or having my childhood letters to God returned “undeliverable as addressed”, or seeing a well-qualified woman turned away from a job interview because my boss didn’t like “lazy Indians” — that scraped away another layer of optimistic naivete and replaced it with cynical skepticism.

Come to think of it, there have been plenty of revealing shocks, and I’ve written or talked about them with all the exclamation points and disbelief they were due. Did thousands of people really send Oral Roberts money when he said God would kill him if he didn’t raise $10M dollars? Yes! They did! Did Tammy Faye Baker, thief extraordinaire, really go on to become a minor celebrity and gay icon? Yes! Did Hal Greenwood, a banker who bilked thousands of retirees out of their pensions, get to keep his multi-million dollar home? Yes! And after he got out of a very short prison stay, he actually ran for Mayor of Grand Marais, MN! And he had lots of community support!

Closer to home, did a family-owned real estate business really steal funds from their client’s trust accounts to pay credit card bills, get plastic surgery, and buy stuff at BabyGap? Yes. Did the state take swift and thorough action? No. They pulled the license of the business owner, but let the actual thief (her daughter!) take over for her. Did I once have a boss who said he didn’t want a woman working for him? Yes. Did the corporation see this as a problem? No, but they did have him attend an EEOC seminar, so that he could learn “more appropriate language”.

The apathetic reactions of the blindly self-involved Me generation I was born into seems to be keep trying to shock me into complacency, but somehow I just get more and more outraged. Somehow the lessons the greater part of society is trying to teach me — like how useless logic is in an illogical world, and how senseless it is to beat my head against the same brick wall, and how really, I should just worry about myself and not worry about all these things I can’t change — continue to pass me by. I keep trying. I keep believing that my generation of human beings, as a multi-billion strong entity, are smarter, more alive, and more passionate than we’ve shown. . .yet.

I thought maybe the reign of King George II, America’s first Imperialist president, might be just the shock this country needed to get off of its collective ass and do something. I was partially right. Many people have spoken out, written letters, gotten involved — yet an amazing 34-36% of Americans still approve of George W. Bush. Meaning that in a group of 100, 34 to 36 people have their heads buried in the sand, or have been brainwashed beyond redemption. That’s certainly a revealing shock, but then again so is the Democratic race this year, in which those who stand united against Bush have chosen to excoriate each other in damning, and often hateful ways, instead of drawing together to ensure a race of reason and integrity.

When Exxon Mobil reported the highest quarterly and annual profits ever for a US company, twice in recent history, I was pretty sure Americans would take to the streets — meaning that they would rebel against the glut, greed, and lies of oil companies, and start walking wherever they could, boycotting gas whenever possible. Instead, the story came and went, and most of middle America shrugged. Welcome to $4 a gallon gasoline. Exxon salutes our apathy.

Outside and inside of politics, child abuse remains the subject that no one wants to talk about anymore. Not even a world-renowned author who has written decades worth of amazingly insightful books. She doesn’t want to answer any more questions, and she doesn’t want to talk to the general public anymore outside of what she puts on her website — which means she’s limiting herself to people who already know her, and who are already in search of answers, instead of possibly educating those who have had no cause to even ask the right questions. In a recent email to me, she said, “. . .everybody who WANTS to know and understand can do it reading in the internet. For people who are afraid of understanding what I am writing I can’t do anything. Even hundreds of interviews will not do.” This is a woman who was once a pioneer, a fighter, an intelligent, guiding voice to thousands trying to escape a dark void. She has grown tired. Apathetic. Comfortable in her ivory tower world, where silence rules, and the unwashed masses are abstract theories and subjects, rather than intrusive, always hurting, slow to heal, not-quite-there-yet, constantly seeking, human beings.

There’s some solace in knowing that the author above “paid her dues” — that she did so much, for so many years for the cause of children — but it’s an empty comfort. There is no one on the horizon to take her place. There are no more Alice Millers. She will leave behind a prolific body of work, but who will there be to add to it, to keep it alive not just in the broken spirits of victims, but in the higher consciousness of the public. Who will continue to wake up the living dead in her absence? Who will be the public voice for the children who cannot speak for themselves?

Alice reminded me of something, though, and that’s about “want”. Those who “WANT” to understand, she said to me. I know, however, that want actually plays a very minor part in this extended play of reality. There was a time most people did not want to believe the world was round. A time when most did not want children off the farms or out of the factories, or women or minorities to vote. It wasn’t that long ago that most Americans wanted a society where men earned more than women, and where women’s choices were extremely limited.

Want is, more often than not, a creation. A person, small group, or other entity has an idea, complaint, or belief, and pushes forward to promote their concept. Other people catch on, and the concept grows and is expanded. Eventually, the “want” of that particular something forms among a majority or a well-backed minority, and laws, systems, products, or other things change to fulfill the want that was created.

Had television never been invented, I doubt we would have ever wanted Tila Tequila or the housewives of Orange County in our living rooms. I doubt that we could have even envisioned a time when, on average, our children would be exposed to 50,000 commercial messages a year, with 1/4 of those ads being deceptive in some way. Not only would we have never envisioned it, we probably would have never approved it — but now our want for television has grown by literally hundreds of channels. The want continues to be created daily by popular culture, charismatic personalities, and marketing companies.

The world around us is struggling and failing in so many ways. From fundamentalist religions to corrupt superpower governments — from genocide to genetically engineered food crops — from gross war profiteering to bad parenting — there is plenty to keep us engaged, busy, and passionate for decades to come.

Unfortunately we, meaning the majority of my generation, have largely failed to create the “want” to better the world. We’re sitting at home, watching American Idol, cheering for one of two new age Davids, and paying little attention to the Goliath of apathy.

I want a worldwide revolution. I want the televisions turned off and the heat turned up. I want passions ignited, and the potential of billions of minds fully realized. I want to scream into the ears of the living dead — wake up! Look at what has happened in your absence! Let’s get busy and change this! Move the food trucks, educate the kids, teach ethics and logic from kindergarten to college, open the doors, let freedom ring, and the sun shine in. It’s not impossible. We just haven’t fully created our want for the best possible world yet.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

In Honor of My Muse: Patricia Neal

She’s got that low, sensual, beautiful, Southern voice. The perfect blend of drawl and inflection that’s all at once a lullaby and a catalyst — an invitation to lay back on the porch swing and lazily watch the moon, or to rise up in the morning like Joan of Arc, prepared to honor the trumpet’s call to battle.

When I write short stories and poetry, it’s most often her voice that accompanies, reading the words back to me, imbuing them with a wealth of feeling that belies the ragged poverty of pen and paper.

Sure, I can write a pretty good line every now and then, but without her cadence, the sentences seem like only so much type — forgettable words that fade all too quickly into a pale background, or that fall short for lack of tone and timbre.

Hers was the first voice I heard that made me really want to sit up and pay attention. I was nine years old, and she was the original Olivia Walton in The Homecoming: A Christmas Story. I would have traded all six kids, and grandma and grandpa too, just to hear her tell the tale on her own.

pn17.jpgI love her face. Her strong lines and proud features speak to me of dignity: of standing steady in the face of adversity, while honoring the spark of passion that creates, laughs, loves, and sustains. Unadorned, her true-to-life beauty rose above her profession of acting. The bleached and painted others who shared her craft seemed stiff next to her, unreal, as if they really were just actresses, and not wise, resourceful women who had known, and could tap into, every emotion in the well of shared humanity.

She is a woman whose voice once inspired a child to write poetry, and whose voice I still hear when I’d rather listen than speak.

This is what I want for navigating the circumstance:
swift justice and tender mercies.
To bestow a fortune of luck upon the unlucky.
An untying of the knot that binds my hands.

To open that heart-shaped Pandora’s box
and find it mercifully empty,
wanting for nothing more than locks and chains
and a place deep in the mantle of Earth
where it will melt into legend,
a myth of Hades’ proportion.

There’s some key around my neck, but I don’t mind.
The clink of decades past,
or the rusted metal of prolonged strength.

If you listen closely, you will hear it — that perfect blend of drawl and inflection. That knowing tap into the well of human experience. On my birthday, I honor my longest, dearest, and most inspiring muse — Patricia Neal.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Stalkerazzi Laws May Get Some Teeth

After the taxpayers of Los Angeles shelled out $25,000 in expenses to protect the public and a young celebrity during her recent trip to a hospital, L.A. Councilman Dennis Zine proposed a new “buffer zone” law that will effect the most rabid of paparazzi — namely those who gather in large swarms, blazing flashbulbs within inches of their target — going so far as to stand in front of vehicles, or engaging in dangerous road chases, all for the sake of a celebrity snapshot.

While California does have some paparazzi laws in place, photographers are rarely cited and when they are the charges are usually misdemeanor, rather than criminal, offenses. Zine’s proposal, at this juncture, looks like it would criminalize the ambush tactics used by paparazzi who fail to keep a reasonable distance from their target, or who engage in dangerous chases.

I believe that stronger laws are necessary and overdue. After Princess Diana’s death, the public was treated to a few moments of a tabloid-driven media that seemed to be examining its conscience. Unfortunately, those moments quickly faded. Since then, celebrities such as James Brolin and Barbra Streisand, Pierce Brosnan, and Lindsay Lohan have all had close calls with aggressive entertainment photographers, who have either run them off the road or struck their cars during a chase. It should not take another death, celebrity or passerby, for lawmakers, news outlets, and the public to recognize the danger.

It’s also a matter of respect. While the worst aggressors will lean on the 1st amendment to claim encroachment rights on another’s personal space, there is no constitutional or other legal right whatsoever to harass another person, or restrict their movements, or impede their activities — all of which the paparazzi has done, and continues to do, almost without restriction.

As I wrote last year, being a public figure of any sort should not negate someone’s right to privacy or freedom of movement. Several posters disagreed with me, basically using the argument that celebrities are different: that being ambushed is part of the career they’ve chosen.

I don’t know how that logic works. As far as I know, celebrities are not locked into a 24- hour contract with the public to entertain or be accessible. A successful career in any field, including entertainment, should not make someone a virtual hostage to the whims of the public or negate their rights as a private individual.

As for the media’s defense that excessive intrusiveness exists because the public demands it — that we “create the need” for aggressive, car-chasing, garbage stealing paparazzi — I can only say it’s an elaborate lie.

First, the public cannot want something it doesn’t even know exists. Most of us don’t know, until the media tells us, what a celebrity’s personal life is like, where they’re dining, who they’re dating, or what tattoos they have on their backside. We don’t know – and most likely would never wonder – what is in a public figure’s garbage can or how many Jack & Cokes they had at the Viper Room.

The type of microscopic scrutiny and bold intrusions into celebrity lives offered up by gossip outlets and their photographers are less a consequence of public demand than public manipulation. Sensationalism sells, but only because it is produced and promoted. If tomorrow, there were no more photographs of panty-less starlets falling on the red carpet or close-ups of celebrity cellulite, the public would be none the wiser, and no less interested in whatever other, less invasive, celebrity news came their way.

It is not the public that demands crotch shots and minute-by-minute coverage of celebrity breakdowns. It’s the media that sets that bar, seeking the most sensational story in the hopes of inflaming or piquing the worst of the public’s curiosity. And unfortunately, it’s that bottom line which informs many tabloid decisions.

Lastly, even if the public had an expressed curiosity in sensationalism — even if they were writing letters by the tens of thousands demanding upskirt shots and ambulance chases — it does not mean that the media should abandon common sense and ethics to cater to the basest tastes. That they do so daily, with or without “public demand,” necessitates the need for stronger, more enforceable laws.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter