corvus

If I did the whole American Idol voting thing, I would totally vote for him.

Herbal tea? That's for weaklings. I like my wu long cha, though sometimes I go for long jing cha. Complete fermentation is a bit strong for me, so I tend to stay away from hong cha. Actually I'm lying. That's my mom -- the tea freak. I drink coffee in the morning and on afternoons that I know I'll have a long... long.... night ahead.

Funny how true that is -- you'd think that first-time nerves should be assuaged by doing something unobtrusive, but it's pushing-the-envelope stuff that makes it work. The last time I dressed up was Halloween with my brothers. I was some kind of bird. Anyway, I honestly don't know what my reaction would be, and I think it really depends on who I'm going with and the atmosphere. I must say though that Tristan's prize was very well won. It reminds me of Bjork's swan dress. And I can quite understand those drag queen.

Those are all legitimate fears -- it's just the degree of fear that might be rational or irrational. I don't think I have phobias, but I'm not voting that because I don't want to jinx myself. I know my mom used to get terrified whenever my brothers or I crossed the street. And when my youngest brother was four and we went to the Grand Canyon, I was petrified the entire time. The ground was crumbly and there weren't any guard rails! And he was just bouncing around like a rocket! My palms still get sweaty when I think of it...

All I can say is that that really sucks. I don't know how easy it is to do this surrogate mother thing. There seems to be a whole ton of legal trouble. Wasn't it in the news lately that some guy was slapped with child support even though he was only a surrogate father? Maybe that was a special case. Also, I don't think there's a whole battalion of women waiting to give birth to other peoples' babies. I am afraid of not being able to connect to adopted kids. When I'm with my brothers, I can see so many pieces of myself in them, and that holds us together even when we can't stand each other. It would be awful if I couldn't make a connection with the child I was raising. But maybe that's an irrational fear. One that apparently the Jolies and Madonnas of this world don't have. But I bet they could just hire nannies if one kid didn't "work out."

It went into this "True Love Revolution" that is "sweeping" my campus. I think it's just an excuse those certain students have made up to cover for the fact that they can't get any. Just kidding. A few years ago, I overheard a pretty interesting conversation between these two jockish guys in a computer lab. Guy A, who was married, was telling his friend to save sex for marriage because "it was worth it." Technically, he doesn't know that. I found that rather amusing.

Before I got myself this ex, I would've expected myself to choose "remains friends" or something. Unfortunately, ax murder is the reality. I am rather disappointed in myself (and the other guy) for how things turned out, but I certainly learned a lot about how arseholish people (myself included) can act.

Wow, good on him for being out like that! It's cool that he can fulfill his obligations and duties while keeping true to his being gay. What're the general perceptions of homosexuality in India?

Maybe if I haven't been stuffing my head with science textbooks for the better half of my life, the thought wouldn't be so appalling. In any case, I am impressed and I honestly admire you and your geekiness. I suppose the whole principle of counterbalance explains why I have been happily reading Helen Vendler's Our Secret Discipline. It's a book about lyric form in Yeats's poetry. I beg everyone to read it -- or any book by Vendler. She makes clear, concise, and -- best of all -- *scientific* observations about poetry. It's not hand-wavy at all; she never hides behind big words like "human condition" or "obsessive solipsism" or whatever. And anyone who's interested in the Oscars should read it, because No Country for Old Men is a quote from one of Yeats's masterworks, specifically "Sailing to Byzantium."

I haven't read those, but I have read her novel The Charioteer, which was a great read. Sadly, the copy I got from my library had the last page missing, so I actually never found out what happened in the end... You read textbooks for fun? Are you some sort of god? I need to pay you libations. I'm reading Jean Genet's Querelle for fun. Initially it was because the DVD of the film had a really hot cover. But then the book seems quite interesting in and of itself.

I was going through the files I had on my computer today, and I found a story I had read years ago and that I'd apparently really liked. I spent most of the day rereading it, and I was floored. I was completely transported -- it was a tremendous experience. I did a Google search to try to find the author's email so as to tell him that he was effing brilliant, but Google search came up with nothing. Apparently, the author had pulled down the stories from the internet. There's practically no trace left. But then I remembered that I had sent the author an email four years ago to say how I enjoyed the story. When I searched my email account, I found his email address. I was thrilled. I proceeded to write a long email gushing over how I loved the story, how it was amazing, how I hoped he would upload them again, etc. I clicked send and got a delivery failure notice. That was a real bummer. What makes it worse is that, apparently, *he* had replied to *me* four years ago -- and I hadn't bothered to respond. Now I feel like a real idiot, especially because there's almost no way to contact him again. I'd had my chance, and lost it. The story, btw, is "Searching for Christolph" by Jason Locke. It was on dabeagle a long time ago... (I feel old!) Anyway, this is one of the things about internet fiction -- you read something amazing (and sometimes unfinished), and you want to contact the author -- but you find that they've just slipped away. Disappeared. It's frustrating and horrible (especially if it could have been avoided). Of course the author has every right to retreat from the internet and distance themselves from past works, but for the readers... Maybe it's just me: when I read something that I connect to tremendously -- and it's usually internet fiction; I guess such works tend to be more personal & accessible -- I want to tell the author that yes, I know how you felt because that's how I felt, you're brilliant and wonderful, etc. But with transient addresses, pseudonyms, etc., it's like beaming radio waves to aliens. Not going to happen. Meh. If I get rich and famous one day, I'll be sure to initiate a manhunt for Mr. Jason Locke...

Thoroughbred Chinese, Jiangsu province. My grandfather forced my dad to crack open a book in the aftermath of the cultural revolution, and my mom was an overachiever, so now I'm an American.

Ah, that is certainly a very good reason. My favorite was The Little Mermaid too, but I didn't have so good an excuse as you had. I suppose that I could claim that since Hans Christian Andersen wrote it while in the grips of unrequited feelings for a straight man, that some of those gay vibes were settling in early... I haven't seen Red Violin, but the soundtrack -- my God. It's the single most brilliant soundtrack ever composed, and Joshua Bell is a monster.

Don't give up! Anyway, reading your blog and your stories, I know you've got a great sense of humor. I've a friend who just lost her father, and she's been going through a really rough time too. x2

Only if it's not gratuitous. Oedipus Rex is a story "about" incest. I would quickly lose interest in a story that actually romanticizes incest (e.g. twin fantasy). On the other hand, I would not mind a story that tries to seriously wrestle with all the problems that an incestuous relationship engenders. That said, the story would have to be *really* well written or strongly recommended for me to start it.

We should do one of those things that shops supposedly do: "You are the lucky 10000th person to walk through these doors! You get a _____!" Although I can't think of what GA has in terms of give-away-able goodies. Maybe automatic hosted member status? haha... jk.

I wouldn't reserve the sacred act for anyone. That is to say, I would be willing to have sex with someone I'm not in love with; that is also to say, I believe in sex for fun as well as for love. Re: unprotected sex, I think it's dangerous even with someone whom you trust and who is supposed to be your OTL. No one is infallible. Anyway, I don't really see the appeal of bareback sex. You can get infections from the E. coli in the rectum crawling up the urethra. How would you feel if you pulled out and found your member coated with poop? It's no joke: 85% of urinary tract infections are caused by E. coli, of which, like, there's more of in poop than poop itself.

I'm in a liberal college, and I have almost no gay friends. It could be that I'm antisocial. I do want more, though. Nonetheless, college is certainly easier than high school for exploring this sort of thing. Less parental presence, more level-headed students. All the same, gay friends don't automatically surface.

Yeah, gay fiction shouldn't be defined by the sexuality of the author. Anne Proulx's Brokeback Mtn deserves to be categorized under gay fiction, or something like it. I do think gay fiction has to have homosexuality as a central theme, though. Otherwise it would be 'sci-fi w/ gay people' or 'thriller w/ gay people,' something like that. But then again, labels and categories are pretty problematic. Just look a straight-bi-gay and the Kinsey scale. In general, I feel inclined to defend fanfiction because sometimes (not often) the fanfiction redeems the original. Now, I've only read Harry Potter fanfiction, but I disliked the last few books, and I think some fanfic authors (again, very few -- but they're there) gave the characters, which were so inspiring in the first four or so books, the due that JKR didn't provide.

Haven't read the article yet, but I read and wrote (and write) fanfiction because it combined stories that I enjoyed with homosexuality, which I wanted (and want) to read for obvious reasons. For a wandering young reader, it's easier to go from fanfiction to slash than to purposefully find "gay fiction." Also, I found that slash gave a sympathetic portrayal of gay people that I really wanted to read. It was my first exposure to anything romantic between two men. I do recognize now that gay fiction and slash are very different, with slash being defined as fanfiction w/ gay characters (and therefore usually written by women), and gay fiction as original fiction written by gay men with homosexuality as a central theme. In slash, I find that homosexuality is almost incidental, whereas in gay fiction, being gay and all its complications -- coming out, longing for straight people, etc -- are more at the forefront. It may be that many women writers write slash because they wish to adopt a masculine identity while retaining heterosexual attraction; gay people probably use gay fiction as a release and a therapy. In any case, I have a lot of slash favorites, which are not cheapened by the fact that they're written by women or take place in someone else's world. Still, I've found that they can't hit a spot that reading gay fiction does.

Even though I should probably think more when I make important decisions, they usually come from somewhere almost subconscious. So these moral frameworks don't feel very immediate to me. In any case, I'm wary of any sort of extreme or total belief in one doctrine or another -- as much as I try to quantify positive and negative outcomes and make a utilitarian choice, I still consider deontological factors. The paradigm that least applies to me would be divine command, since that wasn't a part of my upbringing, but I think it does exist in my thoughts, but more as a form of Keats's negative capability.

I recently read this interesting and rather short article in TIME magazine about gay relationships. Some points the article made: - gay people in relationships don't yell as much in arguments - they use more humor when arguing - nonetheless, gay relationships last shorter than straight ones - gay people are worse at making up after quarrels - too much tension kills straight relationships, but apathy kills gay ones Would people here agree or disagree?

Live, I've only seen the Phantom of the Opera, which I saw recently in New York. I love Phantom -- I really do -- but I was disappointed by what I saw. I guess I didn't really have a problem with the technical aspects, such as the costumes, the chandelier, etc. although they could have been improved. It was the singers/actors who were the real disappointment. The guy who played the Phantom had a vibrato a mile wide, jerked about like a spider, and sounded as though his mouth were full of spit. The Christine could hit the high notes, but she couldn't hold a pianissimo above the staff, and her diva behavior was a real turn off. From youtube clips of the original London cast (Crawford, Brightman), I know that Phantom can be much, much better. Disturbingly, the Phantom that I saw supposedly played the role more than any other singer/actor in history; I really wonder what that says about aesthetic standards at Broadway. Maybe it's better in London.

Happy birthday! Enjoy those dance lessons. And it seems that I'll be joining you in twenty-hood in eight months or so. Goodness. O__o

I've limited gaydar. It's only gets clear in hindsight. And I'm easily confused by metrosexuals. Case in point: I once heard a guy say, "Oh, I love that shirt you're wearing!" Gay, right? In the next breath, he said, "My wife would love it too!" :wacko: Of course, he could be gay and married to a woman. But you know...