It may finnaly be time to clear the s...

Finally
It may finally be time to clear the slate
Move to a new home
Start over
Enjoy the novelty of adventure

To somewhere
Where the rain cleans
and is not merely a tease

Where I can afford
To be alone
Really alone
Alone
But not lonely
To take the place of the pervasive
Lonely but not alone

Help me fate
Help me find this place
The right place
Hit and Miss is too long a method

Help me find
Somewhere where I can stop looking
because nowhere would be from me to look

The journey to you has been long and will continue to be
I will always wish you were here to take this journey with me
But that would ruin the point wouldn't it?  It would

Be nice
Words to be live by
Be nicer
So where to be nice?

I really shouldn't feel this way

I really shouldn't feel this way
I'm not lonely - I've got friends
I'm not lonely - but I feel alone
I snuggle with a comforter
Fantasize that the fabric I feel
-is slick, weaty skin
-warming to my touch
-touching to warm mine
The sweet taste of the back of his neck
I can taste it
-Sweet yet salty
-Strong yet mild
So strong is my fantasy that I can taste his neck
I'd think myself sick, but I value the escape of this fantasy
I taste so this fantasized boy can feel better, and not alone
I'm not lonely - but I feel so alone
I'm not lonely - at least in my mind
I'm not lonely - at least with him

He is out there feeling this way (I hope)
Yet how do two souls so far apart
Cure this lonely feeling
And really... just... taste?

Have you ever lied down and wondered:...

Have you ever lied down and wondered: What sort of character am I?

Like it really mattered

Do you wish your character to be anything - good - bad - heroic - humorous - friendly - interesting - great?

Then do you do anything about it.

Is it fair to desire to be a character - any character - as long as your character is described as a character.

Like letters on a paper we are all characters waiting for the plot to use another U or I

Is the character we choose paramount on the attention we receive in the sentences we live in?  Or is the rarity of a character paramount on the interest it createz

Or is the novel in which we are written omniscient?  The rules of the universe so powerful that we have no power to alter our character?  For a w is two v's and a t is an l who has yet to be crossed.  and an l and a I are often confused for one another. There are lines that are blurred - but is that our doing or the doing of our omnipotent writer? or a mishap or otherwise miracle?

So I beg my own question:  What sort of character am I?

And I hope to, at some point, be all of them.

It is the mind to make this world

It is the mind to make. I don't believe in a God that is preached. Often Loving, but contradictorily smiting. The flaw in a preacher is HIS justification of how the making of heaven is by a God HE twists to that device to make that heaven suit HIM.

God, to me, is everything. The air I breathe, the body I live in, the family I'm a part of, world I stand on, stars I look upon and the space in between, the thoughts I think, the thoughts everyone thinks, the thoughts we share. In our blood, our tears, our shit, our accomplishments. Blessed Beautiful and the ugly, pious and greedy. Almighty and powerless - always rising to power to yet again fall from our minds.

Ultimately God is those three words: exist, things, and reality (because even that which is unreal is realized)

Yet God is also their opposite

God is he, she, it, that, everyone, nobody. And is the hardest to not pronounce a sir. Only through editions can we label appropriately.

But God is not to be preached to me. I am to procure God for myself.

I have been distracted from my place within, but then again my belief in pre-disposition and eternity drives me to think that I was meant to have that distraction as that was how I was to be... just that. Distracted for my enjoyment, because life is to become more and more difficult. And the difficulty is mine to create.

I have to begin giving back to the God who has spoiled me, for however I was spoiled I'd be made that much kinder and gentler and wise to existence.

The hardest part about God is how hard it is to comprehend that which has so little qualities - yet so many different categories - such a large extension.

I believe in the stars, I believe in this world, I believe in Love, I believe in others, I believe in myself
I believe the sun is both our past and our future - father/son - mother/daughter - one/two/infinity, I believe in the heavens as I can see them in the stars, I believe that Hate can be conquered by the seeds we plant in the earth, I believe in all humanity because what connects it is love, I believe in God because I believe in others.

Looking for something greater than myself is easy, knowing what really exists is not for me to know, but knowing that it does exist brings faith to my heart. I know what is meant by thinking - It may only be an extraction of being, but my thoughts no matter how far imagined are mine and Gods. And I think I'm fine with that.

I have always thought that, felt that, and somehow know that I was meant for something far beyond my realization. I now have faith in that what I am meant to be, think, and say is part of God. I'll let God guide, and hope I make the right steps. For the wrong ones may allow the pain of God's malice override the benevolence and imagination he's beset onto me to use.

We are but the eyes of God who have tried in the mirror to see who we think the almighty is. But the reflection is not God - for we are not God, and only part of. For we know that the reflection is not us - the reflection is light reflected off flesh off a mirror and back to flesh. All part of God, but not who God is. If we place two of these mirrors to face one another and can finally know God, until then our eyes fool us to think God looks as we do, but we can know that God is there, just not know what God is.

This may be my personal proof for God - to realize God is there - combine God within all things - allowed to exist as part-taker of my thoughts and a thought of. It is the mind to make this world - as to reference that which has the largest extension, but smallest comprehension.

---2009 02 22 William Oliver Korteland Boller

Boller, William

Professor M. Pearson

English M01C; 71535;
MW2:30PM-3:50PM

17 September 2008

It’s
Not Mutually Exclusive, Folks:

Can’t Being a Man and Being Homosexual be
Separate?

    Choosing
a societal issue that appeared in the Muy Machoproved no easy
task because the complexity and depth that are conveyed spark many
different topics which catch my attention. The variety of topics
froze me in a state of indecision, but it soon became clear to me
that the best topic was one that was personal. I am faced daily with
a curious myth in American society: Heterosexism.
Merriam-Websterdefines this as "discrimination or
prejudice by heterosexuals against homosexuals" ("heterosexism"
1). This is more a definition of homophobia than what I find
heterosexism to be: the expectation and pressure of a society for its
members to appear (as well as be) heterosexual. Often the result of
heterosexism is that homophobia. Heterosexism and homophobia make up
a perceived fear among men that they could possibly be any less of a
man, and these fears are frequently referenced in Muy Macho,
particularly in Ilan Stavans' "The Latin Phallus" and Luis
Alberto Urrea's "Whores." What is amazing is that although
Muy Machocenters on the Latino definitions of masculinity;
this disorienting conflict between homosexuality and masculinity
applies on a more contemporary level.

    We
are obsessed with placing ourselves into a box, label, or myth that
we believe will serve us by giving us placement among a group and
greater purpose. Urrea makes reference to a 'Macho Box' which is how
Latino men prove to each other they were macho by self-electrocution
(Urrea 106). In the macho box these men hope to infuse and shock
masculinity into their spirits when in essence they are really slowly
killing themselves from the inside out. I find this to parallel
closeted men and women, those who can not reconcile their own
homo-erotic impulses, whom constantly are trying to show the straight
world a façade of heterosexuality.

    Urrea was brought into a whore house because his
father believed him to lack machismo and because of this perception
his father believed him a "faggot" (Urrea 102). I don't
believe being labeled with a stigma could have helped Urrea's
self-esteem. The use of hate speech effects both homosexuals and
heterosexuals by creating an air of insecurity and vulnerability and
reinforcing the stigma and ill-regard towards the target of the hate
speech. Urrea's tone suggests that he was embarrassed by his father,
and showed the vulnerability being called a faggot caused him. Urrea
was then forced to compare his current, calm behaviors with the
stigmas of homosexuality, and contrast it all with the aggrandized
ideal of masculinity.

    In his essay, "The Latin Phallus",
Stavans makes an interesting conclusion about the role of masculinity
in that the symbol of the penis creates purpose and drive to repress
homosexual culture (Stavans 164). All these Latino men's efforts to
provide the presentation of being a man fail because they often loose
sight of where true strength comes from. Being a 'man' is viewed as a
complete exclusion from homosexual desire, and any homo-erotic
impulse is seen as a sign of being less of a 'man'.  A
homosexual's sexual desire is at direct odds with the mainstream's
opinions of masculine sexuality, and in effect homosexual culture is
repressed by that perception of masculinity and assumption of
heterosexuality.

    Stavans confronts this stigma on homosexuals by
exposing that gay men often still play important roles from laborers
to governmental members (Stavans 154). Heterosexism is the standard
that assumes everyone is heterosexual, and when a homosexual is
discovered to hold an important role in a heterosexist society it
becomes a huge controversy. I find this strange because that
individual's sexual orientation was probably constant; his
orientation did not change.  The only change was the discovery
of his taboo orientation, and this changed the public's opinion of
him, and striped him of his public favor.

In a recent study of college students to measure
levels of homophobia the highest homophobic response occurred in men
whose standards for masculinity were rigid and high, but perceived
themselves to not be meeting those high standards (Lance 791). This
leads us to believe that a lot of what causes homophobia is
individual insecurity regarding masculinity. When faced with the
knowledge that someone they know is gay, their own insecurities of
themselves are brought to the forefront of an awkward situation.

    I think the problem is that the assumption that
being a "man" is exclusive from being a homosexual and
because no thought is put into allowing the two to co-exist or
co-habituate.  The instinct for machos is often to over-do the
more desired masculine response using brutality and violence. To
many, being a 'man' is what gives self esteem. For example, in the
ghetto slums of young urban America, "manhood and respect are
flip sides of the same coin; physical and psychological well-being
are inseparable, and both require a sense of control, of being in
charge" (Anderson 179). Yet this assumption has exception when I
use myself as an example, because I feel I can be respected for both
being a 'man' as well as being attracted to other men.  In fact,
I find a few feminine qualities sexually unappealing.  Of
course, I have been in a setting where my well-being was not
threatened when I came out.  This is why I find it important to
spread a level of tolerance and education in a community where
heterosexuality is falsely assumed onto its members.

    Back to the study of college student's with
homophobia.  It was interesting to find that the more time
students with homophobic tendencies spent with homosexuals in a
non-threatening environment, the more they slowly came to accept
homosexuals. This is called the "contact hypothesis" and is
based upon demystifying heterosexism by recognizing common ground,
beliefs, and values (Lance 792). This gives me purpose and reason to
not be afraid to and to "out myself" in a college class
environment. I'm aware that if homophobic students are simply exposed
to me in a non-threatening way then their tolerance of homosexuals
will increase, and heterosexist assumptions will decrease.

    I
find the sacrifice men make simply to preserve the status that they
are “Macho” amazing. Of course, the entire concept of
masculinity and heterosexism goes far beyond what I can tackle in a
short essay, but I found it interesting to consider the
inseparability that is contained in the male psyche between respect,
masculinity, and sexual orientation. This fusion is referenced
frequently in the essays in Muy Machoand simply skimming some
of the other essays I see the references to overriding masculinity. I
found Stavan and Urrea’s essays most comparable to the issues
of heterosexism and homophobia that are related to my own personal
struggle with society.

Works Cited

Anderson, Elijah. "The Code of the Street." Readings for
Sociology. Ed. Garth Massey. Boston: W. W.

    Norton & Company,
Incorporated, 2005. 171-83.

"Heterosexism." Merriam-Webster
Online Dictionary. 2008. Merriam-Webster Online. 8 September
2008.

    <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heterosexism>.

Lance, Larry M. "Social Inequality on the
College Campus: A Consideration of Homosexuality." College

    Student Journal. 42.3 (Sept 2008): 789(6). General OneFile. Gale.
Moorpark College Library. 10 Sept.

    2008
<http://find.galegroup.com/ips/start.do?prodId=IPS>.

Stavans, Ilan. "The Latin Phallus." Muy
Macho: Latino Men Confront Their Manhood. Ed. Ray Gonzalez.

    New
York: Anchor Books, 1996. 143-64.

Urrea, Luis Alberto. "Whores." Muy
Macho: Latino Men Confront Their Manhood. Ed. Ray Gonzalez.

    New
York: Anchor Books, 1996. 99-110.