sex warehouse

Hate your ex? Ever have evil thoughts of retribution, hell and damnation? Envisaged fire and brimstone raining down upon their heads? One man has taken his misdirected feelings of ill will and channelled them into an online literary opus of such obsessive focus it would raise the most curious of questions as to why he ever married his ex-wife in the first place. Newton's third law of motion states "To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction". If you consider his current hate as the reaction, would you be right in assuming that at one point the "action" was an equal love, just as intense?

The players in this sad story of marriage gone awry are Anthony and Allison Morelli. After an eight marriage characterized as stormy, they divorced in 2005. However Mr. Morelli decided to use the Internet to voice his side of the story and created a blog entitled "The Psycho Ex Wife" in December 2007 with the tagline, "The Psycho Ex Wife is the story about a marriage, divorce, and subsequent custody fight between a loving man, his terroristic ex-wife who is strongly suspected of suffering from Borderline Personality Disorder (at least from our armchair psychologist diagnosis), and the husband’s new partner." He then set out to describe in detail all things relating to his ex-wife, the joint custody of their two children and anything else he felt necessary to vent.

On the page "Cast of Characters", Mr. Morelli describes his ex-wife (he uses the acronym PEW, Psycho Ex Wife throughout the blog):

She’s on the precipice of 40 and probably looks all 50-years of it. Imagine if you will, Jabba The Hut, with less personality. She spends her time with her bipolar sister (PP, see below) drinking her days away bemoaning her victim status, when she isn’t stuffing the children with fast food, buying them toys, or pushing them towards the TV or computer.

He describes himself (he's 42 as of this writing):

He’s on the brink of 40 and believes he looks in his 20s. He’s not conceited, he just doesn’t live by the “you’re only as old as you feel” – he tosses in “…and pretend you look however old you feel, too!” He’s handsome, but I’m biased. Before PEW divorced him, PP told her she would never find someone as great. Damn, she was right for once.

After the introduction of the entire cast including PEW's codependent mother, PEW's alcoholic father, PEW's bipolar sister and their kids, this page has a list of 88 comments (as of this writing) from various readers who have discovered the blog. Is it surprising? The comments are very positive about the web site and many describe their own situation as being similar to the author's. It's important to note that some of the commentators are women, apparently the new partner of the ex-husband, and who are describing their partner's own ex-wife. There seems to be certain camaraderie between these people as they are sharing a similar (negative) experience.

According to a Time Magazine article, Morelli doesn't hold back on denigrating his ex, calling her a "f---ing psycho" and a "black-out drunk." A Google search turns up two pages on the site where Morelli has written "she's a f**king psycho". Another Google search returns three pages containing "black-out drunk".

From 2007 onwards, it seems the existence of this blog remained unknown to his wife and their two children who are now 10 and 12. However in August 2009, Allison discovered the site. (Yahoo Shine Aug 9/2011) In a posting dated August 2, 2010 entitled "Notable Crazy Email #52,010", Anthony writes:

One of the many things that PEW has taken to doing since the discovery of thepsychoexwife.com has been to stalk and read the site and the forums incessantly. She does this from home, her sister’s place, her parents' house, and yes – even her workplace. This has resulted in a barrage of crazy emails.

During a hearing held on June 14, 2011, Family Court Judge Diane Gibbons ordered Anthony Morelli to close down his web site and banned him from mentioning the three in public. "This is about children," she said."You may say anything that you would like to say. You may publish it. You may put it on a billboard. But you will not have your children, because that is abusive." (San Francisco Chronicle)

Anthony Morelli is in violation of the judge's order
As a curiosity, if you type in the URL http://www.thepsychoexwife.com, you will get an all white page with only the text:


However, the entire site is still online; it is only that initial page which is missing. Click here for the About page and here for the Cast of Main Characters. In fact you can find all of the pages by doing searches through Google. In other words, it would seem that Mr. Morelli has not taken his web site down and is definitely in violation of the court order. All he has done is to replace the initial default page with the above message and the link to his new site where he solicits donations for his legal costs.

MSNBC: Matt Lauer and his story on The Psycho Ex Wife
A video dated August 9, 2011, shows a segment from the Today show where first reporter Amy Robach tells the story of Anthony Morelli and his blog then Matt Lauer interviews Starr Jones, a former prosecutor, and Dr. Gail Saltz, a psychiatrist, for their take on what's happening. Curiously enough, there seems to be a legal angle to the case where Morelli may have an argument for free speech. However, his wife would have to bring a civil suit against him to prove his actions were defamatory. Nevertheless, as a parent, as an ex-spouse, as a human being, everyone seems to be in agreement that Anthony Morelli's actions are confrontational and not good for his children. Anthony is not a nice man.


Why did that @#$%^* bastard divorce me?
In this blog posting I talked about some of the vitriolic writing I had run across penned by women about their ex-husbands.

Because he's a lying, two-faced sonofabitch. He can't keep it in his pants. He's a sex addict. He's a goddamn perverted deviant jackin' off to Internet porn. He's an ungrateful, unfaithful, untrustworthy, underhanded un-man with a tiny d**k. He's a selfish @#$%^* whore-chasing douchebag that deserves to be chemically castrated then banished to some far-flung South Sea island where he'll be forced to work on a chain gang for the rest of his rotten miserable life.

I went on to ask some questions about what really went on behind the scenes which led up to the divorce.

I can't help thinking that there is more to this story than he's a @#$%^* douchebag. ... I'm certain that there are some truly bad people out there. Adolf Hitler was a bad man. John Wayne Gacy, the American serial killer who raped and murdered 33 teenage boys, was a bad man. I just find it hard to believe that every single @#$%^* bastard one day decides to leave his wife and children, ruin his reputation, besmirch his good name, alienate his kids and turn himself into a "bad man" just because he's a douchebag. He actually wants to be bad man as opposed to being loved and admired? Really?

Anthony Morelli has suggested that his ex-wife, Allison Morelli is an alcoholic. In one posting, Allison writes about taking her children to an A.A. meeting. There is more to this story than simply Allison being psychotic.

Anthony Morelli has written any number of postings which pour scorn on his ex-wife. He has vilified her, humiliated her, and besmirched her reputation from here to eternity. Just what does he possibly hope to achieve by all this?

If there is an objective to have everyone happy, successful and at peace with themselves and the rest of the world, if there is an objective to have the two children involved successfully co-parented by Anthony and Allison, would anybody feel than Mr. Morelli has tackled the issue in a manner that would achieve any of these goals?

Final Word
In my blog Tricia Walsh: Let's divorce on YouTube! I tell the story on a disgruntled woman who posts videos denigrating her husband in what the judge called a blatant attempt to get the upper hand in the settlement negotiations to try and quash the pre-nuptial agreement. It didn't work.

Tricia Walsh is an extreme case just as Anthony Morelli is an extreme case. Nevertheless I have seen numerous shades of gray in various blogs written by those who are going through a divorce, who are trying to find their way after the divorce or who are locked in a custody battle. Is everyone taking the high road or does a little of Tricia Walsh and Anthony Morelli slip in periodically when somebody decides to vent in print?

A divorce lawyer, who is divorced himself, told me the other day that in his opinion only 10% of divorces turn into major confrontations. That is, the majority of divorces are settled reasonably with both parties being civil to one another. As a glimmer of hope to everyone, he went on to describe how he and his ex-wife had a nice trip to New York together to visit their daughter adding that now, he and his wife are friends. I couldn't help thinking of Molly Monet of Postcards from a Peaceful Divorce and how she has gone through a divorce, come out the other side and has now become friends with her ex-husband to the point where the two of them together can successfully co-parent their children.

I know that it is important for me to be vigilant about my own feelings. I can be hurt and I can wallow in the pain. I can find fault in others and I can get stuck blaming them for my problems. Nobody is perfect; God knows I'm not. Yes, it's not easy, but the sooner I can accept, the sooner I can move on. Anthony Morelli started his blog in December 2007 and he's still at it coming up to four years. That's a long time to be writing about the psycho ex wife. Instead of making peace, instead of finding a solution, instead of moving on, he is continuing to wallow in his rut of destructive and self-destructive hate. Anthony Morelli is not a nice man. I don't want to be anything like him.


References

ThePsychoExWife.com

The Psycho Ex Wife: About

The Psycho Ex Wife: Cast of Main Characters

Save ThePsychoExWife.com
About: We started ThePsychoExWife.com to share our story because we know how stressful it is to deal with a high conflict ex that uses the court system to harass you. We’ve been dealing with it for 7 years now and there is no end in sight.

Time - Aug 11/2011
'Psycho Ex-Wife' Blog Starts Free-Speech Fight in Court by Vanessa Ko
A man is trying to fight a judge's order to remove a blog that he used to talk trash about his former spouse for the past four years, citing his right to free speech.

The Daily Mail - Aug 10/2011
Judge orders husband to take down blog about his 'terroristic psycho ex-wife'

Video: MSNBC - Aug 9/2011
Divorce debacle: Bitter blog ordered taken down
[N.B. If you move your mouse over the bottom of the video, you get a popup menu which allows you to turn on sibtitles or a transcript.]
Former prosecutor and legal commentator Star Jones and psychiatrist Dr. Gail Saltz talk about the battle over the controversial website “ThePsychoExWife.com.” NBC’s Amy Robach reports.
[Amy Robach gives a report about this story but it is Matt Lauer interview with Starr Jones, former prosecutor and Dr. Gail Saltz, psychiatrist which is the most interesting part of the video. Legally, Anthony Morelli has the right to write his blog. However from the point of view of being a good parent and a good ex-spouse, he is not right.]

Video: Fox News - Aug 10/2011
Blogger Fights Court to Keep 'Psycho Ex-Wife' Site
[Anthony Morelli is a cyberbully?]

Huffington Post - Aug 9/2011
The Psycho Ex-Wife: Free Speech Fight Over Divorce Blog by Anna Bahr

NY Daily News - Aug 9/2011
Judge orders 'Psycho Ex Wife' website creator Anthony Morelli to take down blog; Morelli fires back
by Joyce Chen

San Francisco Chronicle - Aug 10/2011
Dad fights shutdown of 'Psycho Ex Wife' blog by Amy Graff

my blog Tricia Walsh: Let's divorce on YouTube!
Philip apparently filed for divorce in October 2007, but Tricia was only served with papers in March 2008. On April 10, 2008, Tricia posted a video on YouTube shot in their apartment during which she "tells all" about her husband including the prenup, being evicted from "her home", the absence of sex in their relationship, and her finding a stash of Viagra, pornography and condoms. During the video, she phones her husband's office and asks her husband's secretary what she should do with the stash.

my blog: Why did that @#$%^* bastard divorce me?
Because he's a lying, two-faced sonofabitch. He can't keep it in his pants. He's a sex addict. He's a goddamn perverted deviant jackin' off to Internet porn. He's an ungrateful, unfaithful, untrustworthy, underhanded un-man with a tiny d**k. He's a selfish @#$%^* whore-chasing douchebag that deserves to be chemically castrated then banished to some far-flung South Sea island where he'll be forced to work on a chain gang for the rest of his rotten miserable life.

2011-08-14

Site Map - William Quincy Belle

Follow me on Twitter

Narcissistic personality disorder is quite a mouthful and while it has a certain air of scientific authority, it does not at the end of the day detract from the problematic reality of dealing with a self-centered egomaniac who doesn't give a s**t about anybody other than himself.

In a recent blog posting by a divorced female blogger, the author discussed the application of this mental disorder to her ex-husband, a disorder officially recognised by the American Psychiatric Association in their publication The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). The Mayo Clinic succinctly defines the disorder as:

Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. Those with narcissistic personality disorder believe that they're superior to others and have little regard for other people's feelings. But behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

The Wikipedia article on NDP states:

NPD is considered to result from a person's belief that they are flawed in a way that makes them fundamentally unacceptable to others. This belief is held below the person's conscious awareness; such a person would, if questioned, typically deny thinking such a thing. In order to protect themselves against the intolerably painful rejection and isolation that (they imagine) would follow if others recognised their (perceived) defective nature, such people make strong attempts to control others’ views of them and behavior towards them.

It is interesting in the above articles to compare the outward appearance of the behaviour and the inner workings of the person in question. At the heart of it, the individual seems to have a deep seated inferiority complex. Now doesn't that strike you as contradictory? There's a guy running around like he's God's gift to humanity - Lord, am I good or what? - and he really has low self-esteem. He is so preoccupied with validation of his own worth; he is oblivious to the needs of anybody else.

At one time or another, it dawned on me how people who were good, that is people who knew they were good, seemed to be less likely to brag. Why? They already knew they were good, probably better than everybody else in the room, so what was there to prove? Note what I said: they knew they were good. They didn't think they were good; they didn't hope they were good or hope that others would think they were good; they just knew they were good. Imagine Tiger Woods in a room with ordinary people. He is the best golfer in the world or pretty close. Why would he brag about this in a room full of people who probably couldn't best his score on 18 holes if they only played 9 holes?

Truly, truly great people who "know" they are great ofttimes turn out to be very generous with their talents. They don't brag; they share. The braggarts are those who doubt themselves. They are constantly seeking feedback, verification of their talents.

This idea of "knowing you're good" seems to spill over into all areas of a personality. A person who is confident, who knows they are good, seems to be more generous, fairer with other people. As I said, what else there to prove?

In everyday life, there have to be many "shades" of this type of behaviour. I can think of a few times in my life when in a fit of egotistical bravado, I have bragged about something I had done or how good I am in general. It's like I just shot a hundred and one and I'm going around my group saying, "Nah, nah, nah, nah, naaah. I beat you. I have the best score!!!" then somebody leans in close and whispers in my ear, "Pssst. That man sitting at the next table is Tiger Woods. He just shot 68."

Okay that personal story is more of a funny story than a serious one. But I do recognise in myself various "shades" of needing validation. Yes, I do have a bit of an inferiority complex at times - not all the time - and in certain areas of my life I guess I do look for some positive feedback. After all, is it only my voice I hear saying that I'm a great guy? It does feel kind of good to hear another voice, even a chorus of voices chiming in once in a while to list off those of my many and imagined characteristics which could be construed as indicative of a person hopefully a notch up from the qualities of a slug.

I have a family story dating back to the 1970s. My aunt Jane married Henry and they had three children. "Uncle" Henry was a printer by trade and started his own printing business. I remember as a young boy visiting this shop with these huge printing presses; it was quite impressive. One day, Uncle Henry walked out. He walked out on his business, his wife, his children, his home and his entire life. Why? As a young boy I wasn't necessarily privy to all the details but later I did ask my father what happened.

It seems that Henry wanted to be big. He wanted to be big and successful. However Henry made a fundamental business mistake in that everybody has to start at the bottom and work their way up. Everybody has to start small. Henry apparently was refusing to do small jobs, waiting for the big scores. They never came. He eventually drove himself out of business. He just couldn't swallow having to go work for somebody else so he left town.

My aunt was left holding the bag on a house with a mortgage and a family of three children. My aunt and uncle did divorce but she had to raise the children by herself. My aunt did not have a very good life. Henry was pretty much never heard from again but through the grapevine, I did hear he married a younger woman and did die prematurely from cancer in his early fifties.

In my posting "Why did that @#$%^* bastard divorce me?", I ask why a man would one day decide to leave his wife and children, ruin his reputation, besmirch his good name, alienate his kids and turn himself into a "bad man". Yes, he's a sex addict; yes, he's a two-timing sonofabitch, etc. but why? Nobody starts out with a goal to be bad. Yes, today I'm going to berate my wife, be cruel to the kids and kick the cat down the stairs. What? Really? Do you have this written up in your day planner? Tuesday: tell the wife she's a bitch.

The premise I was skirting while trying to surreptitiously lead the reader to my conclusion was that perceived obstacles to being open and honest can lead us to hide stuff and not be truthful. Bam! Something out of character comes bursting onto the scene and you stand there stunned asking "Where the H did that come from?" while not realising it had been percolating below the surface for some time. In the article I was talking specifically about sex but it could be applicable to other things. In the above story, Uncle Henry couldn't talk about his business and his desire to succeed. He couldn't talk about his failure and his (perceived) humiliation. Yes, he ran away but he ran away because he felt there was no way to escape what was for him an intolerable situation. Being a "bad man" was less painful than living in a community where he imagined that day after day after day everyone would point at him saying, "There's the printer who went bankrupt."

Final Word
For whatever reason, our left arm gets caught in a wood chipper and is ripped off. As in the Kübler-Ross model of coping with dying, the five stages of grief, we will all go through denial, anger, bargaining, depression and finally and hopefully acceptance. Is part of acceptance trying to make sense of it? If we can somehow explain it, give a reason, even come up with an underlying scientific cause, will we be better able to accept it?

I like to use the analogy of the sun coming up in the morning. No matter how much I may hate it; there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. The sooner I accept this fact, the sooner I can move on to those things in my life I can actually change. And likewise, if I don't accept it, I am going to remain "stuck" in life, complaining about the sun coming up in the morning, something which is completely outside of my control. Using the expression Zen-like to qualify one's traits such as a Zen-like peace or a Zen-like acceptance of the situation seems humorous but it is also an accurate description of what we must do to truly find our own inner peace.

I can beat the wood chipper with a sledgehammer. I can have the wood chipper crushed and sold for scrap metal. I can do any one of a number of things to vent my anger and maybe it will make me feel better. Sort of. Partially. Temporarily. But at the end of the day, my left arm is still gone.

If there is any consolation, it may be in this. Uncle Henry wanted to be big, so much so, he couldn't face failure and left. Narcissistic personality disorder? Probably in spades but I am certain my aunt would have used the more vernacular @#$%^* bastard.

I recognised a long time ago that those who have wronged me are probably living in their own hell because of it. Nobody starts out wanting to be the "bad man". I am positive everybody would prefer being loved and admired. Uncle Henry knew deep down that he was a bad man and found it a terrible guilt to live with. The best way of dealing with it was to never again in his lifetime see those people who would remind him of his greatest failure: his life. I'm sure it ate him alive. He lost his life: his wife, his children, his family, his home, family vacations, his children's birthdays, Christmas, New Year's Eve, summer vacations, visits from my family so we kids could play together. He knew he was wrong but could never admit it to himself. He never made the healing step of making amends and he was never at peace with himself. I bet he fell to knees more than once over the years and sobbed his eyes out at his loss.

Living well is the best revenge.
- George Herbert, English clergyman & metaphysical poet (1593 - 1633)

If George was alive today, you might punch him in the nose. Don't you just hate it when somebody is right? Of course, something being right like living well doesn't necessarily mean that it is easy to do. Accepting the past, truly accepting the past and moving on is not always straightforward.


References

Wikipedia: Narcissistic personality disorder
Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder. The narcissist is described as being excessively preoccupied with issues of personal adequacy, power, prestige and vanity. Narcissistic personality disorder is closely linked to self-centeredness.

Wikipedia: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is published by the American Psychiatric Association and provides a common language and standard criteria for the classification of mental disorders. It is used in the United States of America and in varying degrees around the world, by clinicians, researchers, psychiatric drug regulation agencies, health insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and policy makers. The DSM has attracted controversy and criticism as well as praise. There have been five revisions since it was first published in 1952, gradually including more mental disorders, although some have been removed and are no longer considered to be mental disorders, most notably homosexuality.

Chronicles of a Sick Rose by Laura Regis - Feb 8/2011
Personality Disorders
Last year I remember taking a personality test which said that I had a Narcissistic Personality Disorder, having read about the signs and symptoms characterized by this disorder I concluded that I did not. Yesterday, I found my self taking another Personality disorder test, a completely different one this time, with different sets of questions, and ended up with the same result: Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

2011-07-25

Site Map - William Quincy Belle

Follow me on Twitter

Because he's a lying, two-faced sonofabitch. He can't keep it in his pants. He's a sex addict. He's a goddamn perverted deviant jackin' off to Internet porn. He's an ungrateful, unfaithful, untrustworthy, underhanded un-man with a tiny d**k. He's a selfish @#$%^* whore-chasing douchebag that deserves to be chemically castrated then banished to some far-flung South Sea island where he'll be forced to work on a chain gang for the rest of his rotten miserable life.

Ah, okay. Now tell me what you really think.

I browse around a few blogs written by some divorcées who have expounded at times on the more questionable traits of their former loved ones. I have previously joked that at times the prose imparts a certain raw emotion which makes me wonder, as a man, whether I would feel more comfortable while reading this text if I was wearing a cup. I have also joked about locking up the paring knives as I have no doubt that if I had been in the same room as the author when she was penning her blog post, I would now be singing falsetto.

One blogger sometimes answers emails from readers who ask questions or ask for comments on their particular situation. The author warns that she's not a professional but tends to give out fairly well balanced responses to these emails. Recently, she replied to an email where the woman told her tragic story: husband divorces her and is shortly afterwards married to another woman. Now the writer was asking about how to get over this but she went on to stress that she didn't want him back because he is obviously a liar, a cheat, and he doesn't care for his children or for her, his ex-wife.

I got to thinking - a very dangerous activity for me - about why. Why would Man A leave woman B to end up with woman C? Yes, yes, he's a lying, two-faced sonofabitch. But why did he do this? What would compel man A to leave woman B? Was there something about woman B that he had grown to hate? Or did woman C have something that woman B did not? If woman B knew what man A hated, would she do whatever necessary to correct it? If woman B knew what man A found so attractive in woman C, would woman B attempt to get it? Yes, yes, he's a selfish @#$%^* whore-chasing douchebag but that doesn't quite answer my question.

Bill Clinton had nine sessions of bobbing for apples in the Oval Office. - Am I the only one who noticed what you get when you change the letter V of the word "oval" to an R? - Why did he do it? Yes, yes, he's just another horny dog who can't keep it in his pants. But why did he do it?

In looking at Clinton, I am reminded about the question of celebrity. Mick Jagger of the Rolling Stones has slept with gawd only knows how many women. Gene Simmons of Kiss has a similar reputation. Basketball legend Wilt Chamberlain made the absurd statement that he had slept with 20,000 women. Whatever the exact numbers are, there seems to be a case for the idea that famous men are the target of those who would like to add a salacious entry in their memoir. So, while we're all jumping on our moral high horse to vilify Tiger Woods for his supposed 120 woman record, I am reminded of this little scenario.

I put you in front of an open bank vault and tell you that you are free and clear to take any amount you want; it is guaranteed that no one will ever know and that you will never get caught. The question now is not whether you'll be punished; the question is merely whether you can overcome any moral compunction which would prevent you from taking the money. Yes, you could choose to not take the money but this would in no way benefit anybody or hurt anybody. The only aspect of this is that the money isn't yours. You would be taking money that wouldn't belong to you.

What would you do? I'm betting you'd take it. Why? Well, why not? Leaving the money benefits absolutely nobody on Earth; it would only benefit your conscience.

Apparently, back in the late 50's, a postal worker in San Francisco found a bag full of unmarked bills (unmarked = the bills could not have been traced) which had apparently fallen off a Brink's truck. - How does a bag of money "fall off" a truck? - The worker turned the bag in. When the story broke, the postal worker supposedly received letters from all over the United States telling him he was an idiot; he should have kept the money. I'd say those people wouldn't think twice about cleaning out the vault in my devised scenario above!

Returning to the question of celebrity: a guy has a woman throw herself at him. It's a sure thing; it's an all systems are go for launch. The question now is this: not having sex with the woman benefits nobody on Earth; it is now just a question of the man's own conscience. Why do it? Well, why not? When opportunity knocks and all that.

But let's come back to Clinton. Billy isn't or wasn't a rock star but we could argue that being the president of the United States does have rock star status. However presidents don't quite have the same promiscuous public image as, let's say, the members of Mötley Crüe. In fact, Barack Obama comes across as a well-grounded family man who is pretty much a nice guy. But why did Bill do it? As I said previously, is the answer merely that he's just another horny dog who can't keep it in his pants? Yes, yes, I've heard the pundits talking about the trappings of power and how the guy in question thinks he's entitled or thinks he's not going to get caught or maybe doesn't think at all and works on some sort of instinctual gut reaction lack of blood in the brain for clear thinking capricious It seemed like a good idea at the time act of stupidity well idiot I guess you didn't imagine those consequences.

But why did he do it? The answer that I'm searching for is something like this analogy. You sit down and have a nice meal. You're satiated. You're full. Your hunger has been satisfied. Okay, at this point you stand up, walk out to your car, drive down the street to the nearest McDonalds and then order a Happy Meal. Why would you do that? I said you had a nice meal. Maybe it wasn't a nice meal. I said you were satiated. Maybe you weren't satiated; maybe your hunger had not been satisfied. I suppose we could explore the possibility of you having an eating disorder as it seems strange to be eating a Happy Meal after you just had a meal but I would back up to the meal itself and conclude there was something wrong: it wasn't a nice meal or it didn't really fill you up. Then again, maybe you're just an ungrateful @#$%^* douchebag who doesn't appreciate all the hard work I put into making you a nice meal. Then again, I'm not much of a cook so I wouldn't be surprised if you went out for a Happy Meal. Let me get my coat; I'll join you.

I digress. Was Bill not satisfied? Was Hillary not playing pin the tail on the donkey enough? Does Hillary bob for apples? Yes, yes, Bill is a horny dog but there's got to be more to it than that. Nobody gets up from the dinner table and drives down to McDonalds for a Happy Meal just because they are an ungrateful @#$%^* douchebag. I'm sorry; there has to be another explanation.

I keep bringing this following story up in my postings but I think it's a good illustration.

Back in the early 90's, I'm watching one of the talk shows, not quite as elevated as Oprah but not as low as Jerry Springer. A couple is being interviewed but we're given to understand they have a secret. Commercial break. We return to see... two women. I look closer. Woman number two is the husband; he's dressed up in drag. The wife explains that her husband has always had a fetish for women's clothes and once a month he dresses up and the 2 of them go out for a drink together as 2 female friends. She goes on to say that her husband is a wonderful man, a great husband, a good lover and an excellent father; he just seems to have this one special quirk and it is the only oddity out of an otherwise exemplary human being.

Now just mull that one over for a minute. We have a gentleman who has a fetish for woman's clothes. How in heaven's name did this couple arrive at a point where the man could bring this up with his wife? Who knows, maybe he told her about his fetish before they were married and she married him anyways. The point is that their relationship was open and honest enough that they could discuss this. But look at the alternative. What if she had reacted to this discovery with, "Eew. Get away from me your goddamn weird-oh pervert!" Well, there's one relationship which would have come to a screeching halt and there's one guy who would say to himself that he would never, ever again speak frankly with anybody about "his secret".

At some point she must have weighed the pros and cons and felt the balance sheet showed more benefits than liabilities. But picture what would have happened if the man felt so ashamed of his feelings that he never talked about them with his wife; he kept them hidden. Do I see a potential headline? "Respected family and business man Fred Schwartz, seen here dressed up in drag in a photograph taken in the local bar Tom's Eatery, was arrested this past Saturday."

In the recent movie Beginners (my review), starring amongst others Christopher Plummer who is just fabulous, the writer / director Mike Mills recounts the true story of his own father who at the age of 75 after the death of his wife and five years before his death, comes out and declares his homosexuality. Yep, this is the story of a man who grew up in an era when homosexuality was considered a disease that could be cured. He married, had children and for all outwards appearances was your normal heterosexual family man. I still find this unbelievable. A guy spends nearly his entire life repressing who he is. How did he manage to keep it together for such a long time?

We are all part of a society which imposes on us rules and traditions which may be good or bad. We grow up with the idea of conforming so as to supposedly gain the approval of our family and our peers. Not gaining that approval can mean being humiliated, condemned and even ostracized. That fear is enough to make anybody shut up, hide themselves and never talk about their true feelings. How can anybody be honest if they are afraid of being criticized? Now I can hear anyone of a number of people saying, "I want an open and honest relationship." Okay, sounds good in theory. Now, for all you ladies, how about your husband calls you aside for a quiet tête-à-tête and tells you he has a fetish for women's clothes and would like to dress up and go out to a bar with you? Do I hear the expression "freak-out"?

This is an extreme example but illustrative of the dilemma. For our entire lives we have had it pounded into our heads what "normal" is and we're scared s**tless of deviating from that standard as I said out of fear of being classified as "not normal". I read in the papers stories of people doing what is reported as deviant behaviour. I read blogs written by divorcées about husbands found out as sex addicts, porn addicts and gawd only knows what else. I ask myself, "Why?" He's a f**king bastard? He's a @#$%^* douchebag? He has a tiny penis? These are good profane catch phrases for venting one's anger and expressing both surprise and disappointment that life isn't necessarily what you thought it was, but there is an underlying issue which has not been identified never mind addressed.

By the way, I suppose statistically, the above is applicable most of the time to the male sex. That's why the title of the article suggests a woman asking the question. We could spend some time discussing the social origins of this behaviour associated with men - Yeah, yeah, he's a @#$%^* bastard. Alright, I got it! - but occasionally I read a certain blog written by a woman who describes with a lot of frankness how after 23 years of marriage with kids, she ran off with another man. It didn't work out and now she's trying to find her way back.

Curiosity
I want to present a couple of ideas to parents reading this blog. I apologise for not being able to give you the name of this controversial educator - it escapes me right at the moment - but I'll fill it in later if I remember or if another reader can help me out.

Dr. X had the idea that children are curious about a lot of things including their own bodies, the bodies of the opposite sex and all the issues relating to reproduction, sex, etc. His theory was that by not answering questions right up front, we were not satisfying the curiosity of a child and by not satisfying it, that curiosity would develop later in life into something more than a normal interest. In his "test school", he apparently followed a policy of speaking frankly with kids. He pointed out that at the ages of 6, 7, 8 or 9, children would quite innocently ask about their sexual organs, the organs of the opposite sex and what they were for. Dr. X would tell them. He would tell them everything.

The results of this social experiment were considered controversial and critics took the good doctor to task about his findings but let me report what he said. His claim was that later in life, boys demonstrated a normal, healthy interest in sex. I remember the doctor saying that when the boys of his school ended up at university with the general population, boys being boys would pass around pornography titillated by the naked women. Dr. X claimed his boys were not particularly interested. Why? Their curiosity had been satisfied years ago. Not responding to innocent questions earlier in life saw a normal healthy curiosity turn into an abnormal curiosity or maybe even an obsession.

Now we could debate whether this idea is true or not but I can point out some odd aspects of my own childhood. My parents never spoke to me about sex. Never. I had some sex education classes in school which discussed reproduction and to a limited extent the mechanics of sex, but I never had any frank discussions of not just sex, but "making love", relationships, feelings and love. Everything I learned about all this came from books. Now admittedly, I was a little unusual in this regard. By the time I was 16, I had read over a thousand books. I had read absolutely everything: astronomy, science fiction (fav!), science, romance, biography plus James Bond, porn (natch!) and even medical books. Yes, my father was a medical man and we had a copy of Gray's Anatomy in the house, the illustrated bible of the human body and I could rattle off such sexual terminology as fraenulum, perineum and labia minora. I lost my virginity when I was fifteen to a 19 year old girl. During our four month affair, I remember her saying to me on two separate occasions, "Are you sure you haven't had sex before? You know an awful lot about it and you seem to know what you're doing." Who says reading the instruction manual is for wimps?

Okay, maybe I was just sexually precocious but my point is to compare this with other guys. On page 2 of Naomi Wolf's article "The Porn Myth", she writes, "The young men talk about what it is like to grow up learning about sex from porn."

Cindy Gallop is a New York entrepreneur, author and self-professed cougar. In her book "Make Love Not Porn", she talks about dating younger men and discovering their entire sex education has come from porn movies. Many would immediately jump to the hasty conclusion that porn is bad but Ms. Gallop points out that the issue is not porn at all. We all do it, yet we don't talk about it. Most parents are too embarrassed to teach their children about sex and talk to them about the issues surrounding it. ... Most countries around the world have not formalized and integrated sex education into the educational system and curriculum. ... hardcore porn has become, be default, the sex education of today.

Is it me or WTF? Where are the parents? Where is the school system? Can any of us who have grown up in the "dark ages" overcome our own fears, prejudices and shame to talk about sex? Geesh, talk with our children? Heck, we'd have a difficult time talking with a professional counsellor about our own sex lives!

Final Word
What happens if you have a secret but are scared to death of the reaction if the secret is uncovered? You feel shame. You're apprehensive. What happens if the secret does come out? You feel embarrassed, defensive; you may even go on the attack. The best defence is an offence! "You like to do what? Eew. You are a disgusting degenerate."

I can't help thinking that there is more to this story than he's a @#$%^* douchebag. I can't help thinking that divorce after divorce is taking place because of a @#$%^* douchebag who is really spent a lifetime scared s**tless of being labelled a disgusting degenerate. I'm certain that there are some truly bad people out there. Adolf Hitler was a bad man. John Wayne Gacy, the American serial killer who raped and murdered 33 teenage boys, was a bad man. I just find it hard to believe that every single @#$%^* bastard one day decides to leave his wife and children, ruin his reputation, besmirch his good name, alienate his kids and turn himself into a "bad man" just because he's a douchebag. He actually wants to be bad man as opposed to being loved and admired? Really?

The truth shall set you free.
- John 8:32

Is it possible that a person's shame about sex, their guilt, their apprehension about even talking about sex is so great, so overwhelming, they would actually chicken out and prefer to run away rather than face the risk, the huge risk, the colossal, mammoth, gigantic, enormous risk of being condemned, humiliated, ostracized, quartered and castrated by society? The father in the film Beginners comes out at the age of 75 in the 1990s. He was born into a world where homosexuality was considered a disease. The American Psychiatric Association only declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973. (Wikipedia)

Somehow I think there is more to this issue than meets the eye. In the meantime, however, all @#$%^* bastards should hide in the closet until the coast is clear or age 75, whichever comes first.


References

my blog: Men are just a bunch of @#$%^& sex addicts!

my blog: Book Review: Make Love Not Porn by Cindy Gallop

Telegraph - July 22/2011
Children as young as five 'should be taught about abortion'
The draft report on sex education, drawn up by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, will be issued to local authorities and education bodies across the world by the end of October. However, it has been strongly criticised for suggesting topics such as masturbation should be discussed with young children, removing the right of parents to broach the issues when they see fit.

The guidelines state that teachers should discuss the idea that "girls and boys have private body parts that can feel pleasurable when touched by oneself" to pupils who are just five years old. By the age of 12, it recommends that children should be taught about the "right to and access to safe abortion".

The report is intended to help countries improve sex education and sexual health, especially in the developing world. UNESCO officials stress that it is up to governments and educational authorities whether they follow the advice.

I note this line in the article: However, it has been strongly criticised for suggesting topics such as masturbation should be discussed with young children, removing the right of parents to broach the issues when they see fit. When parents see fit? Like about never?

2011-07-22

Site Map - William Quincy Belle

Follow me on Twitter

A recent spate of articles I've read recently reminded me that a great deal of what I come across represents a person's opinion and not necessarily fact. That person has not carried out a double blind test or taken a statistically meaningful sampling of test subjects or thoroughly analysed a situation with the scientific rigour of a university approved unbiased methodology. No, I'm reading a person's opinion based on the sum total of their education and experience. But are a person's education and their experiences enough to correctly assess whatever it is they are giving their opinion about?

Dr. Marty Klein (b 1950) is an American sex therapist, educator and public policy analyst. I am fond of quoting his saying (he got this elsewhere): "The plural of anecdote is not data." How many times have I heard somebody state an opinion while substantiating that opinion with "I know a guy who..." I know a guy? One guy? Not ten out of a hundred guys, but one guy? "My neighbour told me the story of their cousin who..." What? Or how about all of us reading a headline in a newspaper: Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Anthony Weiner or how about Tiger Woods, Jesse James and David Duchovny?

On June 30, 2011, the web site Project Syndicate, the world's pre-eminent source of original op-ed commentaries (About: Who we are), published an article by Naomi Wolf entitled "Is pornography driving men crazy?". This same article was reprinted by Al Jazeera with the lead-in Could the widespread availability and consumption of pornography in recent years actually be rewiring the male brain?

Ms. Wolf's article paints a dire portrait of men who look at pornography. In fact, as I read through the various points she makes in her article, it would seem that Ms. Wolf's conclusion is that the state of mankind, and here I am referring to the male sex, is on the brink of some apocalyptic sexual cataclysm the results of which will leave humanity without marriage, without relationships and without progeny due to a complete inability of the penis to become erect in the company of a real woman. I also make note of these lines from her piece:

There is an increasing body of scientific evidence to support this idea...

The hypothesis among the experts...

This article contains no references. There are no footnotes. Not a single link to a supporting document or university study.

Six years ago, I wrote an essay called "The Porn Myth," which pointed out that therapists and sexual counselors were anecdotally connecting the rise in pornography consumption among young men with an increase in impotence and premature ejaculation among the same population.

"An essay". "anecdotally connecting". Not a study, not a double blind test, not a university sanctioned unbiased methodology, no, an essay pointing out an anecdotal connection.

In the "The Porn Myth" by Naomi Wolf (The New York Mag - Oct 20/2003), the author makes the statement which sums up the gist of her article: The onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real women, and leading men to see fewer and fewer women as “porn-worthy.”

From there, I read

Here is what young women tell me on college campuses...

For two decades, I have watched young women...

When I came of age in the seventies...

The young women who talk to me on campuses...

The young men talk about...

I will never forget a visit I made to Ilana, an old friend... 

a conversation I had at Northwestern [with] a boy...

It occurs to me that I am not reading what one would construe as a scientific paper; I am just reading one person's opinion. This is an opinion based on this person's experiences. O... kay..., I say very slowly. But just how reflective of reality is this? Is the sky really falling?

Anthony Weiner. One guy. The prediction is that in the fall of 2011, the planet Earth will arrive at a population of 7 billion people. Anthony Weiner. One guy. Out of 7 billion people. Okay, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Anthony Weiner. 3 guys. Out of 7 billion people. Let me return to the list of names I wrote previously: Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Anthony Weiner plus Tiger Woods, Jesse James and David Duchovny. 6 guys. Out of 7 billion people.

Cars vs. Parachutes
In a fit of bravado, maybe male bravado, I did a tandem parachute jump last year. Before doing it (Parachuting: If God had meant me to...), I did a little research into the safety of the sport.

In the United States, there are over 3 million jumps each year and about 30 people die as a result. This works out to approximately 1 death for every 100,000 jumps. So, your chances of dying by doing a skydive are 1 in 100,000.

In comparison, 40,000 people die each year in car accidents. That works out to 1.7 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles. If we take the average person driving 10,000 miles a year, you have a 1 in 6,000 chance of dying in a car accident.

You are almost 17 times more likely to die getting in your car than by jumping out of an airplane; 1 in 100,000 versus 1 in 6,000. However the web site howstuffworks explains why we're afraid:

• Skydiving accidents are so infrequent, they usually hit the headlines. In contrast, car accidents are so frequent, they are either not reported or we just tend to ignore them.
• Familiarity: we are familiar with cars; we drive them; nothing bad happens; we think it's safe. It's only when we check out the stats we may clue in to just how dangerous cars really are.

We pick up a newspaper. We read the headlines. We get a piece of information which tells us to worry about something but are we worrying about the right thing?

What's the real problem?
On page 2 of Naomi Wolf's article "The Porn Myth", she writes, "The young men talk about what it is like to grow up learning about sex from porn."

Cindy Gallop is a New York entrepreneur, author and self-professed cougar. In her book "Make Love Not Porn", she talks about dating younger men and discovering their entire sex education has come from porn movies. Many would immediately jump to the hasty conclusion that porn is bad but Ms. Gallop points out that the issue is not porn at all. We all do it, yet we don't talk about it. Most parents are too embarrassed to teach their children about sex and talk to them about the issues surrounding it. ... Most countries around the world have not formalized and integrated sex education into the educational system and curriculum. ... hardcore porn has become, be default, the sex education of today. Is it me or is that pretty sad?

What are the "real" stats?
World Health Organisation: Global Status Report on Alcohol - 2004
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that there are about 2 billion people worldwide who consume alcoholic beverages and 76.3 million with diagnosable alcohol use disorders.

The current total world population (2010) is 6.8 billion but in 2004 it was around 6.4 billion. So, in 2004, 31% of all people consumed alcohol. 4% of the drinkers had a problem or 1% of the total. It stands to reason that some people who watch pornography would have a problem but I return to the idea of nobody is proposing to outlaw alcohol.

In the book "A Billion Wicked Thoughts", two authors wrote about their study of the Internet search patterns of 650,000 users. An interview in Time Magazine with the author Ogi Ogas had a reporter asking the question, "Did you find evidence that porn is addictive?"

We looked at individual search histories for half a million people using an AOL data set [which does not identify the users]. It seems to be less than 2% of people, among the people who search for porn, who have a significantly elevated number of searches.

The World Health Organisation estimates that 4% of all drinkers have a problem. Dr. Ogas concludes that less than 2% of the users in their AOL study demonstrated a significantly elevated number of searches suggesting a possible problem such as addictive behaviour. In my posting Pornography: My conclusions, I wrote about those proposing the prohibition of sexual materials with the idea: no porn, no problem.

Alcoholics go to Alcoholics Anonymous. Drug addicts go to Narcotics Anonymous. Compulsive gamblers go to Gamblers Anonymous. Is everybody who takes a drink an alcoholic? No. Is everybody who takes a toke a drug addict? No. Is anybody who lays down a bet a compulsive gambler? No. I think you can see where I'm going with this. Anecdotal cases of men wrapped up in Internet porn and ignoring their wives is indicative of men who have a problem, a personal problem. Let's not bring back prohibition to deal with one man's problem.

The so called facts
There are statistics being tossed around which if not being just outright lies, are being completely misinterpreted. It is quite evident that special interest groups with their own agenda are playing fast and loose with the numbers in order to back up conclusions they have made without the rigor of scientific method.

Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted.
- sign at the Rally to Restore Sanity, October 30, 2010, Washington DC

In my blog Pornography: Statistics Laundering I write about an investigative reporter for the Washington Post who tells how a U.S. politician says that child pornography is a $20 billion a year business. This is repeated by the New York Times. The reporter traces the number to the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children which got its numbers from the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. which got its numbers from an advocacy group called End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes which got its numbers from the FBI who say they never said that. The reporter says he never did find out where this number came from.

In this April 2007 article titled Is pornography addictive? the author states, "Now there are an estimated 420 million adult web pages online." I think all of us would be duly impressed by such a number; it seems like a lot; in fact, it seems like a mountain. However, in my blog Pornography: How much is there on the Internet? I discovered the estimated size of the Internet is 24 billion pages. 420 million is merely 1.75% of the total however in my own experiments outlined in my blog; I estimated the amount of adult material to be less than 1% with 1% equal to 240 million. It is interesting that the number 420 million comes with no references so I can't verify it. When my own calculations come out quite differently, I have to doubt the legitimacy of this estimate.

It is this sort of presentation of statistics which I find very misleading. Anybody would say 420 million is a large number, a large scary number but in the context of the entire Internet, it is not just small; it is insignificant. My conclusion is that people are presenting numbers and deliberately leaving out other numbers to portray the situation not as a minor problem but as a catastrophe of Biblical proportions. In reality, the sky is not falling.

Final Word
Naomi Wolf is not a scientist. In fact, any research she has done seems to be based on her personal experiences. Her conclusions are based on anecdotes. In reading other background information on the author and her work, especially the criticisms of both her conclusions and her supporting information, I can't help thinking that as a supposed expert, Ms. Wolf may have done what I have seen many others do. They start with a theory then attempt to find "facts" to support it. The Wikipedia link in the references below has some interesting things to say about Ms. Wolf's "methodology".

However the most important point about this article "Is pornography driving men crazy?" is this: Ms. Wolf has no solution. She describes, she condemns, she laments but she doesn't solve. No, she doesn't truly solve. In her analysis, the solution is to take porn out of the picture and the problem goes away.

Prohibition did not work. Why? People like to drink. And don't forget that only 4% of the drinkers have a problem. That means 96% of the drinkers use the product wisely and enjoy themselves. Do we bring back prohibition because of the 4%?

Ms. Wolf writes, "The young men talk about what it is like to grow up learning about sex from porn." You're kidding me, right? Your solution is to remove porn? First of all, that solution ain't gunna work. It is so impractical; you can take that number right off the table immediately. Secondly, young men learn about sex from porn? Where are Mom and Dad? Where are the schools? How in heavens name did anybody arrive at a point in their life where they may be contemplating having sex and yet nobody has given them any instruction on sex, relationships, emotions and the basics of interacting not just with the opposite sex but with people in general? Are people learning how to drink by watching Hangover and Hangover II? Are people learning how to socially interact with people by watching the Expendables or a Tarantino/Rodriguez Grindhouse movie? (Don't get me started on violence on TV ! Carnography: Vegetarians need not apply)

Ms. Wolf is an observer and as a writer, she writes about her observations. I would suggest she is also a fearmonger who promotes her own narrow view of the world and the status of relationships between the sexes. She offers no concrete, practical solutions to any of the issues mentioned in her articles. Focusing on the obvious without looking at the underlying issues is tantamount to saying, "If we get rid of all the fire trucks, all fires will stop."

The next time you pick up a paper and see a headline about Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Anthony Weiner, Tiger Woods, Jesse James or David Duchovny, I would remind you there are another 7 billion people on the planet (minus 6) who are not in the headlines. Sky-is-falling, apocalyptic rhetoric scares the public and distorts its perception of the issues. We cannot properly address an issue if misinformation prevents us from properly assessing the issue.

Parents, how about talking to your children?


References

Wikipedia: Naomi Wolf
Naomi Wolf (born 12 November 1962) is an American author and political consultant. With the publication of The Beauty Myth, she became a leading spokesperson of what was later described as the third wave of the feminist movement.

my blog: Book Review: Make Love Not Porn by Cindy Gallop

my blog: Cindy Gallop: Make Love Not Porn

The New York Mag - Oct 20/2003
The Porn Myth by Naomi Wolf
The whole world, post-Internet, did become pornographized. Young men and women are indeed being taught what sex is, how it looks, what its etiquette and expectations are, by pornographic training—and this is having a huge effect on how they interact.

Al Jazerra - Jul 2/2011
Is pornography driving men crazy? by Naomi Wolf
Could the widespread availability and consumption of pornography in recent years actually be rewiring the male brain?

Project Syndicate - Jun 30/2011
Is pornography driving men crazy? by Naomi Wolf
It is hard to ignore how many highly visible men in recent years (indeed, months) have behaved

2011-07-11

Site Map - William Quincy Belle

Follow me on Twitter

You've heard the phrase. You've probably used it. You may have thought about it; you may have ignored it. You may understand its meaning even experienced it firsthand or you may think it's not true at all. But where did this phrase originally come from?

Thomas Wolfe (1900-1938) was an American novelist considered to be a major writer of the early 20th century. Unlike some, he became famous during his lifetime through four lengthy novels, numerous short stories and dramatic works. His work is known as being highly original and he is seen as one of the first masters of autobiographical fiction. His famous contemporary William Faulkner said that Wolfe was their generation's best writer and his influence is seen in the writings of Jack Kerouac, Ray Bradbury and Philip Roth.

As an aside, autobiographical fiction or autofiction as the name implies is a literary work which merges autobiographical and fiction elements. It is partially fact, partially fiction, changing names and locations and recreating events to render them more dramatic. There is no pretence of exact truth; events are altered or exaggerated for artistic purposes. - Artistic license or poetic license is a term used to describe the distortion of fact to supposedly improve a piece of art. This could be literary art or could be a visual art such as sculpture or painting.

Wolfe was born and raised in Ashville, North Carolina. In 1929, he published his first novel "Look Homeward, Angel". It was an autobiographical novel that fictionalized his early experiences in Asheville, the narrative chronicling family, friends and the boarders at his mother's establishment on Spruce Street. In the book, he renamed the town Altamont and called the boarding house "Dixieland." His family was fictionalized under the name Gant, with Wolfe calling himself Eugene, his father Oliver, and his mother Eliza.

The publication of the novel caused a stir in Asheville, with its over 200 thinly disguised local characters. Wolfe chose to stay away from Asheville for eight years due to the uproar, and he traveled to Europe for a year on a Guggenheim fellowship. Look Homeward, Angel was a bestseller in the United Kingdom and Germany. Some members of Wolfe's family were also upset with their portrayal in the book, but his sister Mabel wrote to him that she was sure he had the best of intentions. (Wikipedia)

"You Can't Go Home Again" is a novel written by Wolfe but published posthumously in 1940. While the story is original, I can't help thinking that it is a curious retelling of the writing and publication of Wolf's first novel. I'm sure this wasn't necessarily the author's original intent but is probably more a connection with the concept of autobiographical fiction.

The novel tells the story of George Webber, a beginning author, who writes a book that makes frequent references to his home town of Libya Hill. When the residents of Libya Hill read the book and see the egregious distortions Webber penned, they begin sending Webber death threats and menacing letters expressing their discontent with the novel, even though it is held in high regard in the rest of the country. Wolfe, as in many of his other novels, explores the themes of a changing America, including the stock market crash and the illusion of prosperity, and the unfair passing of time, which inhibits George from ever being able to go "home again". ...

The title comes from the finale of the novel when protagonist George Webber realizes, "You can't go back home to your family, back home to your childhood ... back home to a young man's dreams of glory and of fame ... back home to places in the country, back home to the old forms and systems of things which once seemed everlasting but which are changing all the time — back home to the escapes of Time and Memory." (Wikipedia)

Why can't you go home again?
If you search the Internet, you can find others have discussed the phrase, dissected it, and summed up their own experiences by repeating it. In light of the above description of Wolf's literary work, what can one conclude about this idea?

I find it interesting to note that there are two main reasons why any of us "can't go back home". First, "home" changes. Heck, some people can say that their childhood home has been torn down to make way for a strip mall! Add to that the other changes. Mom and Dad may no longer be with us. Childhood friends have moved on. And etcetera and etcetera. But the second reason is that we ourselves have changed. How can "we" go "home" because the person we are now is not the person who was originally at home? Imagine me, a grown-up man, going home to live with Mom and Dad as if I was nine years old. How's that one going to work?

Let's not forget though how our memories of home become fuzzy. We may be nostalgic for the good ol' days but just how good were those ol' days? We're longing for some ideal we have in our head, an ideal which may in fact have never existed. We may remember living at home with Mom and Dad as being good but we have forgotten the skinned knees, the bouts with the flu and all those times Mom and/or Dad did not allow us to do what we wanted. What about the chores? It wasn't completely a free ride.

Nostalgia: You can't go home again
In my posting Nostalgia: Ah, but you can never go back, I say that even if you manage to get back, it is never the same.

At university, I was pals with a guy. We had some great moments in class, in the cafeteria, studying for exams and shooting pool. Years later, in a fit of nostalgia, I looked him up and we got together for a coffee. I had moved on; he had moved on. It was pleasant swapping stories but we really didn't have anything between us. That time spent together was very much due to the moment, to the mutually shared experience of going to university. Without that experience, we didn't have anything, nothing which could be construed as a friendship.

Over the years, I have come to accept this as a fact of life. You share a moment, have a good time then say sayonara, adios, meet ya on the other side.

Divorce: You can't go home again
This is a life altering experience. You are crossing a line never to step back. You are walking out the door never to walk back in. You are "leaving on a jet plane" but unlike the lyrics of the song you know you won't be back again.

In my posting Nostalgia: Ah, but you can never go back, I talk about leaving someplace, taking that last nostalgic look around before walking out the door. Nostalgic? Ha! I haven't left yet and I'm already feeling nostalgic! However it's because I know I probably will never see that place again.

I go to the door; I turn around and take a last look. I remember the good times, the bad times, all the various incidents that occurred. I don't know what will happen tomorrow. Will I back? Or is this the last time I'll see this place? I don't know but somehow I must remember that every journey inevitably comes to an end. That may not be the most desirable thing but if it is so, I must remember I had the luck of taking the journey in the first place.

Unlike leaving university, or leaving a vacation spot, leaving via a divorce is not the nicest of experiences. Even if you are the one initiating this change, it can be, ah, unsettling. Certainly in reading a number of blogs written by people recounting their experiences before, after and during the proceedings, it would appear that all parties end up irrevocably changed. Sometimes for the good; sometimes for the bad.

Out of all the blogs I've read, I would have to say that Molly Monet of the blog Postcards from a Peaceful Divorce seems to be an exception to the rule. Out of all the divorces I've read about, this may be one of the few where the protagonists have not just about killed each other but have managed to arrive at some sort of post divorce friendship. Shouldn't everyone be so lucky?

Tom Sturges
In the May 10, 2011 article on the Huffington Post "Truths Of Being A Divorced Dad", the author starts off by saying: Divorce carries with it a stigma, a harrowing possibility that life will never be as good as it was.

Mr. Sturges goes on to talk about being a divorced father, what it meant to him and what he did.

Life is what happens. It is a defensive game. You have to be prepared for anything to happen, because anything can happen. Like divorce. Who gets married expecting that to happen.

The author's truths turn out to be obvious and straightforward but I imagine that everyone in the midst of these most traumatic of times may not be able to clearly see beyond the end of their own nose and the personal and emotional pain they are suffering. I would advise anybody reading this article to click over and read the entire article by Tom Sturges. Well written and as I said, insightful. As Pauline Gaines of Perils of Divorced Pauline amusingly commented on the Huffington page: "Could you be my ex-husband? Please?"

User mallen123 makes an interesting comment on the same Huffington Post page.

Thank you for writing about the civility, restraint, and compassion required to maintain a healthy and happy family. Divorce is all about adjustment in the face of pain and unhappiness. "What do you want your children to remember?" is the question I continually ask myself. In the end, it isn't about me or how I feel about my ex-spouse. Many of us feel that we were wronged and hurt for no good reason. As difficult as it is, we must put aside our personal pain and focus on being the best parent and ex-spouse possible.

Ten years from now, I want my children to know how much they were loved and respected even if their dream of an intact family wasn't realized. As you noted, we don't expect divorce when we marry. But, what we should rely upon is our own ability to be the bigger person for the sake of our children and our own self-esteem.

Use divorce as an opportunity to get closer to your children. Make peace with your pain. Time tempers hurt feelings and allows us to regain perspective. Show your children that adversity can still be an opportunity for love, caring, and a better life. Animosity and resentment never bring happiness.

Final Word
You can't go home again. It's over; get used to it. Lot's wife looked back and she turned into a pillar of salt. (Genesis 19:26) It would seem the best advice is to always look forward, to always move forward. After all, we are constantly moving away from the past towards the future so should we not set our sights on what will be and not on what was?

Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened.
-Dr. Seuss

Is anybody going to say that's easy? I know it's going to hurt when I take off the Band-Aid but it's true; ripping it off in one tug is the best way of doing it. It hurts but it hurts less in that you don't drag it out. Tom Sturges said, "Divorce carries with it a stigma, a harrowing possibility that life will never be as good as it was." There's no doubt that life will be different. I pull off the Band-Aid and discover a scar, but the skin is healed. The scar may fade; it may always be there, but the skin is healed.

Tom and the various people who commented on the article presented some wonderful ideas.

Saying bad things about the ex is poor form and harmful to the kids. I think it's in poor form in general whether said to the kids, to the rest of the family or to friends. If you haven't got anything good to say...

"What do you want your children to remember?" For that matter, what do I want my family, my friends, even my colleagues to remember? It isn't about me. As difficult as it is, we must put aside our personal pain and focus on being the best parent and ex-spouse possible.

Animosity and resentment never bring happiness. It isn't easy, but all of us have to drop it, get over it and move on. What other choice is there?

We may quibble about the details, but in the end, believe it or not, I would like to see everyone happy, successful and at peace with themselves and the rest of the world. Yes, you can't go home again but you can make a new home.


References

Wikipedia: Thomas Wolfe
Thomas Clayton Wolfe (October 3, 1900 – September 15, 1938) was a major American novelist of the early 20th century.

Wikipedia: Autobiographical fiction (autofiction)
Autofiction is a term used in literary criticism. Coined by Serge Doubrovsky in 1977 with reference to his novel Fils, autofiction refers to form of fictionalized autobiography. Autofiction combines two paradoxically contradictory styles: that of autobiography, and fiction. An author may decide to recount his/her life in the third person, to modify significant details or 'characters', using fiction in the service of a search for self. It has parallels with the faction, a genre devised by Truman Capote to describe his novel In Cold Blood.

Wikipedia: Non-fiction novel (faction)
The non-fiction novel is a literary genre which, broadly speaking, depicts real historical figures and actual events narrated woven together with fictitious allegations and using the storytelling techniques of fiction. The non-fiction novel is an otherwise loosely-defined and flexible genre. The genre is sometimes referred to as or faction, a portmanteau of "fact" and "fiction".

Wikipedia: You Can't Go Home Again
You Can't Go Home Again is a novel by Thomas Wolfe. It was published posthumously in 1940 from the October Fair manuscript.

my blog: Nostalgia: Ah, but you can never go back
This always happens to me. I travel; I stay some place then I hesitate when I leave feeling a touch of nostalgia. Business recently required me to fly out West for an overnight stay; one of those fly in for a meeting, fly out immediately afterwards. Despite my short stay, I hesitated at the door of my hotel room. Of course, a last look around for anything I may have overlooked but also to have a last look at some place I would never see again.

Wikipedia: Leaving on a Jet Plane
"Leaving on a Jet Plane" is a song written by John Denver in 1966 and most famously recorded by Peter, Paul and Mary. Peter, Paul and Mary's version first appeared on their 1967 Album 1700; however, it did not become a hit until they released it as a single in 1969. It turned out to be their biggest (and final) hit, becoming their only #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart in the United States. It was the second to last #1 single of the 1960s.

The Huffington Post
blogger bio: Tom Sturges
Tom Sturges is executive vice president and head of Creative for Universal Music Publishing Group. Founder of the Manhattan Beach, California, Unified School District’s inspiring Every Idea is a Good Idea GATE Program, he is an active volunteer with LA’s at-risk youth. When appointed a position as a mentor of a child from an inner city class, he was unable to pick just one child, excluding all the others, so he did the unthinkable: he asked to mentor all 37 children in the class. He continued to mentor them all the way through adolescence, an experience which inspired the award-winning documentary, Witness The Dream. He is also the author of Grow the Tree You Got. Tom lives in Los Angeles, California.

The Huffington Post - May 10/2011
Truths Of Being A Divorced Dad by Tom Sturges
Life is what happens. It is a defensive game. You have to be prepared for anything to happen, because anything can happen. Like divorce. Who gets married expecting that to happen.

So here are some of the truths that were most life changing to me, once I joined the club and became a divorced dad...

2011-07-01

Site Map - William Quincy Belle

Follow me on Twitter