I didn't have a good day yesterday. It would have been, had things gone differently, my 22nd wedding anniversary, and, travelling to work last night, I couldn't help but reflect on the difference between the happiness of my wedding day in 1993, and the situation I find myself in now. That difference is my fault, of course, and in many ways comes back to the dichotomy encapsulated in that earlier, happy day, the fact that I married not because of who I was, but despite that identity. I did, genuinely, love my ex, and I'd convinced myself that marrying her was the right thing to do, for both of us, that she was the one to 'save me from myself'. The seeds of destruction were already there, though, even on that day - there was someone else there who had caught the eye of 'the real me', my sister-in-law's nephew on her husband's side, a pretty, blond thing of 11 or 12. Then, of course, there was the gorgeous Scandinavian boy (the one who, many years later, became the 'template' for Xander, amongst other things) I've written about before, poolside during our honeymoon. You can fool most people, most of the time, if you're careful enough, but the one person you can never fool is yourself. Which leads into another reason for my current unhappiness with life in general, and myself in particular. One thing I've tried to convince myself of over the years is that I don't want to have penetrative sex with a boy. Lips, tongue, touches, but not that 'ultimate' act. And, of course, I've had to admit to myself, finally, that my conviction simply isn't true. I do want it. Before anyone jumps to the conclusion that I'm going to rush off and force myself on a boy at the earliest opportunity, I'd like to ask for at least a moment of rational consideration - just because I want something doesn't mean that I'm actually going to do it, any more than the 'average red-blooded male' would force himself on a woman he found attractive. But when such an admission, even an internalised admission, is thrust upon you, it certainly doesn't do anything for self-esteem.
Love & best wishes to all
Sammy B
I get you. And it applies to many other things in life. But people prefer to revile this particular want. In any case, stay safe, and try to bolster the self esteem, as hard as it is to do.
ReplyDeleteI was taking pictures today. The eye candy was out and about. Had to be careful with the telephoto lens!
Peace <3
Jay
Hello Jay
DeleteYou're right that even the wanting, however little intention of acting on the desire might be present, is far too much for many, if not most people to countenance. The assumption that you're 'evil' because of what you are rather than what you do is one of the most esteem-sapping aspects of being a boylover in this current version of 'society'.
I've missed out on a potentially good 'eye candy' week - it's been school half-term week, but my being on nights has taken me more or less completely out of circulatation in that context. FML!
Love & best wishes
Sammy B
You are certainly not alone, Sammy.
ReplyDeleteLike you, I found out many years ago that I cannot fool myself. Goodness knows I've tried - but it doesn't work. For me, the only solution is to avoid, as much as possible, engagement with the outside world. I venture out only when the risks of sucumbing to temptation are at an absolute minimum. I choose a time of day when eye candy levels are at their lowest. That way I don't have to worry too much about not being able to trust myself. There's been odd occasions in the past when I've found myself so close to giving in, that the pain almost killed me. I tell myself it was the most sensible thing to do, and really the only choice I could make. But it's hard to know if I'd hate myself more for not giving in, than I would if I had. Living, or should I say "existing", like this can be sheer hell at times.
Drifting from one bout of depression to another is hardly a preferred option. Seeing things through an alcoholic blurr sometimes helps in the short-term, but in the world we live in these days, I often wonder if it's even worth carrying on at all. I hate having to lie to people when they ask how are you, and you feel duty bound to answer "I'm fine", when clearly I'm not. But it's a lot simpler that way - it saves an awful lot of explaining, and it would probably ruin an otherwise perfectly good friendship anyway.
If nothing else, finding your blog has has helped me realise that there are others out there who, like me are also going through their own private hell.
Be strong Sammy, stay safe. That's all we can hope for.
Warmest regards - Dave
Hello Dave
DeleteWe undoubtedly have many parallels in our respective situations, albeit with some differences, certainly of approach, too. I don't think I'd ever want to avoid seeing the cuties, even if I do try and stay away from situations where there's any real chance of genuine interaction with a boy, because of the temptation factor, of course. As you say, the 'to act or not to act' question is a torturously difficult one - I guess the 'precautionary principle', never doing anything, is the only 'safe' option, but when, as I did around a dozen years ago, you have a 14 year old who is very obviously keen and eager to 'engage', and, indeed, was the one driving the agenda, not acting, as I chose to do, makes me feel worse about myself than anything that might have happened between us, because it definitely would have been consensual, whatever the law might say. And yes, there are others out there in the same kind of situation, I've come across at least two or three through this blog, people who have e-mailed me, or commented on various posts, over the past five years. would that there was some way we could come together to support each other, even if only in a cyberspace sense, but the levels of paranoia that we all feel seems to make even that 'virtual' connection very difficult to enact. I almost said 'maybe one day', but, realistically, given society's attitudes, that 'one day' isn't likely to fall in my lifetime, if ever.
Love & best wishes
Sammy B