the birth of an emotion, darwininan or neo-darwinian. i do not know. a benefit for our survival. an adaptation to co-opt and co-operate. a tongue flicker maturity. a determinant, we inject and infuse for the benefit of our race, our species. in networks and mesh. in groups and cohorts of narrowed sentimentality. seeking and beseeching. wanting, and fretting. crooning and writhing in song and tears. you hug your soul. touch your skin. dispassionate, cold, icy and frigid. it's time, you say. when wasn't? it was, is and may be a labyrinth of fatalism. i seek shelter in souls, and lyrics of song. and bricks by the river bed. in dams and shells of careless luminosity. in lapidary verbs and disabled faculty. what is it you say about the power of your capability? i am incapable, may be. with a sagging hopefulness of fruition in the domain of the reciprocals. it is not arithmetic, i said. why do you compare? there are no rules. no cues. no safe harbor for the mechanics of your interrupted sunday surprise. holding wigs, and moon beams. reading and fine-tuning a life of wish, dream. modified success. mutated parts of an invidious bias. how did it feel to love?
diseased with a tenderness and a deep, lesioned existence. how long can you long? for a while. how long a while? a century? a day? it takes time, you explain. and what if there wasn't a one? because of the misshapenness of my physiognomy. the counterintuition of my sexual fervor. after all, the physicality is the draw, isn't it? and then, the nature of blinks. the volume of shrieks. the howl and screech of frames, and beds, and porcelain jugs and steaming kettles. the first approach of the love navigation, is a lust for the frame of the body. you know, i think of creation sometimes. and if god made man, then why did he or she decide the gradient of the physical external -why X stuns and Y repulses. the prettiness-ugliness imbalance. why would your god pick and choose and create this divide? so that the individual may suffer from an unknown outcome or consequence of action/ inaction -is this a reasonable conjecture? what a shameful equation you have composed, i cannot say. this lookist, classist, sexist panoply of the century micro-cosmos, an adulterated social normality perhaps. if fatalism and your god's creation ended in the architecture of every man -why the ugly obese woman who regrets her fate. the majority expect the archetype goddess and what is the outlet? a social suicide and despondence of can i ever choose? will i ever love? the same with man, the sexual whims of let us pick and choose and point to the being of looks and beauty and then proceed to learn the man. think with the real, and not your ideology trains. to a point, where you ask. who declared the rationality of man? i see no trace. i see no hue or mold of the reason tree. for you tried, you say. you tried the sex sites, the mainstream, the bar strips, the online clique. and what worked? the web of shame. the soulful rejection of the lucky elite. you may not be one. you are not the one.
take two.
No comments:
Post a Comment