I am, on one side, encouraged from many sources to give up, let things go, start over from scratch. I am told to forget the past and look on to a brighter future, free from the anger, pain and shame. As convenient and relatively simple as this path appears, I am afraid it is less than desirable. The result is that either I accept the blame or I deny it, but nothing gets resolved. There is closure, but no gain, for any party involved. Everyone loses.
Second, I am urged to fulfill the virtues of a hero. Listed as they are by Mr. Marshall who claims these virtues will, when completely embraced and properly performed, invoke their feminine/goddess counterparts in my life-partner.
Light Masculine (Hero)
FREEDOM, strong, providing, focused, emptiness, logical, giving, independent, rational, destination, doing, present, exclusive, solid, concrete
Light Feminine (Goddess)
SAFETY, gentle, nurturing, multitasking, fullness, intuitive, receptive, collaborative, emotional, journey, being, radiant, inclusive, flexible, abstract
This is not an easy task and even when executed perfectly, do not guarantee success. What is quite infuriating, is that they leave the man vulnerable to the woman's anger and spite. I do agree that included in the principals of heroism (and other sources) is the rule/agreement that the man should take nothing personally. By not taking things personally, he defeats the purpose of those spiteful and angry words/actions. However, ignoring them does not get rid of them. They still exist and may continue to exist and in many cases, the very act of not taking them personally, only makes the anger and spite grow exponentially. Emotional abandonment becomes the new charge and those virtues of, freedom, emptiness, logic, independence and, rationalization become the targets of a whole new attack.
My last option is a sort of mix of the two. First I would define the meaning of a hero.
he·ro - n. pl. he·roes
1. In mythology and legend, a man, often of divine ancestry, who is endowed with great courage and strength, celebrated for his bold exploits, and favored by the gods.
2. A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life: soldiers and nurses who were heroes in an unpopular war.
3. A person noted for special achievement in a particular field.
I am not a myth, I am real. Nor am I a legend in anyone's eyes but my children's and my ancestry is far from divine. My courage and strength are limited only by my own self confidence, which is low to begin with. Any bold exploits I may have been responsible for have always been misinterpreted as selfish grabs for control and spiteful self-interest. The nobility of my purpose is unquestioned, only my motivation. Staying in this situation is risky, my vulnerability is complete. I am open not only to moral attack but also legal allegations that can destroy both my future and my ability to ever achieve the hero I am attempting to become; regardless of my guilt simply because of what I am and what I am not. My ability to trust my partner not to destroy me utterly while I am opening myself up to her is not strong enough to continue. The apple on my head is not the target and I have yet to hear otherwise.
So, where does that leave me? What happens to heroes who fall? They die. Their existence ends in one way or another. If the mortality isn't immediate, it soon follows in both the physical and the emotional sense. There is a survivor. A hero who does not die when his reputation does. When his faithful following or his loving spouse has deserted him to the harsh world despite his good intentions or his misinterpreted actions he becomes something else. This something else can be one of two roles with little or no difference in public image.
The first, he has become a villain. He is what people think of him: selfish, abusive & exploitive. Whatever his outward appearance is, it's the motivations that are important. Villains embody all the things that heroes are raised up to defend the world/spouses from. The most effective and most destructive villains are of course those who were once heroes. The fallen heroes carry that extra bitterness and loss that makes them so cruel as to outshine even the worst evil from career villains. Their fall also places them in a special light in the eyes of the public, as those who have spurned or lost the trust once placed in them. The villain/fallen hero is evil and almost utterly indistinguishable from the second possibility; the anti-hero.
anti-hero, principal character of a modern literary or dramatic work who lacks the attributes of the traditional protagonist or hero. The anti-hero's lack of courage, honesty, or grace, his weaknesses and confusion, often reflect modern man's ambivalence toward traditional moral and social virtues.
Other anti-heroes include Dirty Harry, Batman and "Every single protagonist in the Sin City series qualifies as an Anti Hero, though given the Wretched Hive they live in, it's pretty much a given. Marv, for instance, feels no remorse for torturing and killing a great deal of people over the course of his story, even bragging about it on one occasion, but he has several lines that he crosses only with extreme reluctance, such as hitting a woman. Dwight, on the other hand, has hit several women in the heat of anger and has let his anger get the best of him on many an occasion, but he never turns his back on people who need him."
By the definitions of the anti-hero and the villain, they appear exactly the same to the narrow-mindedness of public opinion. The vigilante/anti-hero has all the same attributes as the villain bar one. They mean to do good for others using whatever means are available or necessary while villains do whatever they want or have to for their own good.
As for the third option that of adopting the role of anti-hero a man in my position would do what was right and good like the hero would, but in return for his efforts would also be forced to carry the mantle/reputation of a villain. His life would become lonely and the public would be hostile towards him. After all, he did wrong. Didn't he? Perhaps, but why? How? Could it have actually happened another way? A hero or anti-hero saves a woman from being struck by a speeding vehicle. In both cases, the potential traffic victim is saved from a very likely horrific death, but the hero is praised for his quick thinking. An anti-hero is charged with improper or inappropriate actions resulting in an innocent person being assaulted. In many other cases, said assault is even flagged as sexual in nature. I feel this is despicable for the rescued to be so unappreciative of their rescuer's selfless efforts and personal risk. This professional victim attitude is prevalent in North American society, rescued people don't think about what was given to them, but what they can take. "Never mind that I'm alive, you touched me and the law says that's wrong".
Mr. Incredible, a celebrated hero, was torn down by such attitudes when he rescued a jumper from his inevitable death. Had someone stopped the man before he leaped, the jumper would have been detained and hospitalized for his own protection under the same laws that labeled his rescue as a personal assault. A CELEBRATED HERO DESTROYED by the selfish nature of the man who owed him his life! Are heroes so common that they can be tossed out or torn down without so much as a fair hearing?
I don't believe the public wants a hero. I don't believe that women want a strong, protective man to to support them. I believe that heroes are nothing but the public's scape-goats. I believe men are only women's stepping stools. The hero/goddess relationship is too close to the mark. I feel that women want to be the divine end-all and be-all in relationships. Let the men take the blame, as long as the women feel safe. of course, only the woman gets to say if she's safe or not and only she knows if her claims of insecurity are (un)founded.
I have personally never experienced Marshall's goddess virtues. I can imagine them, define them and know what to look for, but I have never actually seen them. I don't believe they actually exist in today's woman and therefor, leaves women to act on whim. Why, WHY should everything in the end belong to the woman? Why is it always ultimately her decision one way or the other if the man/hero is actually deserving of praise or prejudice? I feel this is not equality of the sexes but a social slavery.
I believe that men, including myself, need to continue doing good. We need to continue rescuing, protecting and supporting the worlds innocent. Whatever happens, we have done right. We must not justify our actions, they speak for themselves. In the end, the greater good was served. Victims need to face their own accusations and ask themselves; "Is this really necessary? Must I hurt others in return for their help?" Our reputations will suffer, our lives will be lonely and hostile. We will be sad, hurt and angry, but we must carry on. So long as our hearts are in the right place, and we fulfill the needs of the innocent when and how situations require them to be resolved, we will eventually be vindicated. I for one would rather be called an asshole and live a long and lonely life, than be a hero and always wonder when and how I will be taken down. Always watching over my shoulder, wondering from who the knife in my back comes from. Heroes will be destroyed, that is their purpose. Appreciation has no part in it. We will never get the proper recognition we deserve. So long as WE know that we did Good, that my friends is called Self Respect.
In conclusion, I decide on option three, to be the anti-hero.
I am free of ownership and unfettered by public opinion.
I will be strong in the face of accusations and assumptions regarding my motivations.
I will provide for those I am responsible for and who depend on me for support when and how my resources and abilities dictate.
I am focused on my goals and will not be distracted by the impatience or wants of others.
I am empty of guilt and shame. Those feelings are like dead weight, useless and unproductive.
I will apply logic that makes sense to me, not forced on me by others, regardless of what the public believes I should consider logical. Living my logic is what counts to me.
I will be giving to who I what I feel are deserving of my charity.
I will act independently of others when it is necessary for I was born alone and alone I will die. Even as the member of a team, my failure is my own, my actions are my own.
I will remain rational in the face of chaos and emotion. Only by keeping a clear head will I be capable decisive and unclouded judgement.
My destination will be my own.
When I act, I will do it powerfully for my actions are my own and deserving of all my energy.
Where I am, my presence will be known. I will not hide behind my fears and insecurities.
My attentions are exclusive to my focus and my will.
My resolve is solid and my faith is concrete. I am certain that I am capable, I will utilize my potential, and the results will be mine in their entirety.
Read my declaration and know that I am a Man. Hear my words and know them for a Hero's voice. Call me selfish, abusive or uncaring. Call me Villain. I know the truth, and Good was done.
So be it.
-----
Friar Greg
Personally, I would rate myself between a Type II "Mr Vice Guy" and a Type III "Good Is Not Nice" Though more on the Type II occasionally humorless while still being rather a Bad Ass.
Sources
No comments:
Post a Comment