I’m a comet
burst through the atmosphere
a brilliant display of light.
I shatter into a million pieces
one for everyone,
as I fall from the sky–
I’m a star
gone supernova,
a brilliant display of light.
And oh, don’t you know
how I shined,
before I at last burst,
before I, Atlas died?
A phoenix, a comet, a star,
I gave myself to the flame–
That’s how you get people’s attention,
isn’t it?
They never look
until it’s too late.
Do I envy those who live on the surface?
Unburdened, shallow,
Depths unknown?
Do I envy a life
that hasn’t been thousands of lives?
Do I envy a life
that hasn’t been death
Thousands of times?
The death,
The rebirth,
The death,
The rebirth,
The death,
What’s it like to just know birth?
What’s it like
to live with a brow unfurrowed,
The suffering of tomorrow
living unborrowed?
What’s it like
to not willingly be Atlas,
a back unburdened,
to be a bird in those skies,
and not the one holding it?
I know what will come of this love:
Still, I choose it.
I also know
what comes of this life:
Still do I live,
Knowing we must die.
We both know this
is too good to last:
Let us not remember our end
before she comes.
Let us live for the now,
This now with tendrils
Extending into forever,
I taste eternity
on your lips–
I am a clock,
you pinned my hands
And stopped time.
That moment
put hooks in my heart,
And as I trudged away
In our funeral march
I think I left it there.
One of the greatest results of my education in Psychology has been deepened stores of compassion. I truly believe that hatred and intolerance fester “under the rock,” if you will, of ignorance. Through the process of learning, I’ve been able to attribute to a lack of wellness what I before would have attributed to an individual’s character.
Perhaps one of the greatest examples of this is in how my perspective of homeless individuals has shifted. Did you know that a third of homeless individuals have schizophrenia? The person talking to themself on the side of the street, for example: it’s so easy to simply write them off as a “crackhead,” or whatever pejorative we’ve been conditioned to refer to them as. We forget, however, that the psychotic symptoms those individuals may display can be the result of a mental illness that they are not receiving adequate treatment for. Often, it is a failure not of that individual, but rather a failure of the society that they are in. They may not have received adequate health care, for example, due to exorbitant costs.
Consider, too, how someone debilitated from a severe mental health condition might be rendered all the more powerless to afford adequate healthcare because of their condition. They may be so mentally ill that they are rendered disabled by their condition, and thus cannot work. Then, because they cannot work, they cannot afford adequate healthcare; and yet, if they were to receive adequate psychiatric help, they would be able to work.
That person that you see on the side of the street speaking in disorganized word salad, talking to themself, clearly delusional and psychotic — so often we forget that there is a person in there. We forget that they were a child with dreams. We forget that they were a child who may have been failed by their parents or the society they were born into.
(Note: I will be using type two diabetes as an example to compare certain mental disorders against. Please understand I mean to offend no one and am merely attempting to use a commonly-accepted condition to demonstrate why the mental disorders I will cover should be more commonly accepted, too! Please message me personally if you’d prefer I alter wording to be more inclusive or if you have taken anything I said to be offensive!)
Those who would argue against these points would likely cite the personal choice of the individual as being responsible for the position they find themselves in. I am not arguing against that in totality; however, know that substance abuse disorder is a disease like diabetes, heart disease, or any number of other diseases that might have both genetic components affected by personal choice. We do not deny the type two diabetic healthcare despite there being the possibility that excess sugar in the diet is behind their illness. We do not deny the smoker care for respiratory disease.
It is no secret that many homeless individuals may have issues with substance abuse. However, if you are to cast blame to them, I’d ask you to ensure that you’ve never been diagnosed with a health condition that you arrived at due to your own personal choice. I’d ask you to ensure that you are not setting yourself up to be dependent on the healthcare system in old age due to not taking adequate care of your health.
Remember that regardless of your own personal feelings on the topic, substance abuse disorder is a medical condition. There are physiological changes in the body and its chemistry when one is dependent on a substance. These withdrawals, for some, can be lethal. Tell me: how is this different from what would happen to an individual with type two diabetes if they do not have their insulin? Both have found themselves in a state of dependence on an exogenous chemical to stave off death due to what is often a direct result of personal choice.
It is generally known that personal choice directly impact a person’s likelihood of developing type two diabetes. Genetics play a role, too. This is the exact same as substance abuse disorder — a combination of genetic predisposition and personal choice make up the reason for the development of the disease. Why do we look at those with substance abuse disorder with such scorn, then, if we do not do that with type two diabetes? To be clear, obviously I am not saying individuals with type two diabetes deserve to receive that scorn; instead, I am saying that we rightfully do not treat them with scorn, and that we should not treat individuals with substance abuse disorder with scorn either.
And yet, remember this: not every homeless individual has a substance abuse disorder. There are homeless individuals with psychotic symptoms or a full-blown schizophrenia diagnosis who have never abused substances, or who first developed the psychotic symptoms and then began abusing substances in their weakened state. That is one of the most important reminders: there are homeless individuals who are quite literally sick from something that they have absolutely no control over who are regarded by society as being of poor character or, at worst, subhuman. The next time you see someone on the side of the street talking to themself, remember the human underneath the mental illness. Remember that they may be someone who is suffering and desperately in need of help.
This is something so damn important — to me and for our society as a whole. We must extend the suffering compassion. And I’ve discovered that learning never perpetuated hatred. Discovery never perpetuated intolerance. Rather, the depths of love and compassion I’ve had access to have only multiplied the more that my mind was fed.
I believe that ignorance and hatred are kin.
I believe that learning and love are, too.
in your awkwardness, i saw honesty.
in his charm, i saw lies.
you took my hand and we danced —
in perfect misstep,
bumping into each other
gracelessly.
you only looked at me and laughed,
your crooked teeth
making my heart leap.
my heart skipped,
and moved like you–
stuttering, fluttering,
not a shred of rhythm.
when we kissed,
i couldn’t help but smile–
i thought i chipped my tooth.
how did this series of imperfections
lead to the most perfect night
i’d ever known?
…
symmetry is a prison
in our flaws,
we became free.
the poet is the mystic, the poet is the seer. the poet is the explorer, the poet is the sailor of the inward ocean. the poet is the alchemist, willing to see gold in the lead of our souls.
the task of the poet is in observation. the poetry is in the way the world is seen; this, too, is the alchemy. each of us are given two philosophers stones, our eyes. the way you see the world is your gift to make gold from lead. your hands, too, are fire — this is the blacksmith’s flame you carry in your palm, you can smelt lead into gold simply from the way your hands shape the world.
be careful, too: your eyes and your hands can make lead from gold. the regret of every man who goes gentle into that good night is this: where they had gold but saw lead, where they had gold but made lead.
your lead is your gold, your gold is your lead.
Tell me of the meaning of beauty
Tell me why I see it everywhere but here
Tell me what it means to be beautiful
Tell me why I’ll never be it
Tell me why
I’ve never let myself be known.
i don’t know if there is a self
to be known.
god made you in his image
please make me in yours.
I belong to the world.
I’ve been everybody’s—
not once my own.
It’s your gaze that matters—
I’ll contort myself
as you please.
I’ll set myself on fire
To know the warmth
I’ve so long desired.
There’s spiders crawling
Underneath my skin
I’ll do anything,
Anything —
For a distraction.
I miss my suffering
I miss my pain
My oldest friend
My truest stain.
here we are,
we’re all trying to be somebody,
to be seen by somebody,
yet we see through everybody,
everybody invisible
to everybody.
i decide to be the person who sees.
that’s all anyone wants, isn’t it?
i want someone to hold my hand,
and not grasp thin air–
i want to lay my head on your chest,
without falling through,
hitting the pillow–
love so oft
a nugget of gold
placed in a palm–
but when you grasp,
it turns to ash,
slips through your fingers,
all for naught.
I stared into the void,
And then I asked:
“Who are you?”
I heard a voice,
That then replied,
“I am that Lord,
The Lord of the deep.
“Have you come to redeem
What’s been condemned?
The monsters that lie
Beneath your bed?
The shadows that dance
Within your head?
Have you come to love
Those in the depths?”
I took a deep breath,
I stared and said:
“What use have I
For the gift of light
If not to shine
Into the night?
“The secret of
The tree of life
Is that to branch
Into the sky
Into the depths
Your roots must dive.
“To be reborn,
I must first die—”
He took my hand,
I shut my eyes.
Hello, all. Last night, I was studying for my final in Clinical and Abnormal Psychology. I was reviewing the Kinsey scale (which both asserts that sexuality is a spectrum — NOT black and white — and aids individuals in discovering where they exist on that spectrum) in my study guide. His methods — interviewing thousands upon thousands of individuals in a first-of-its-kind objective analysis of human sexuality, free from the confines of moral, religious, or philosophical mores — piqued my interest. I decided to purchase two of his books: Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female.
He approahed his analysis of human sexuality as if he was objectively studying the mating patterns of any given species of animal (perhaps an optimal way to conduct this research). I found the introduction to his book Sexual Behavior in the Human Female moving, inspiring, and powerful. Though I have only scratched the surface, I have quickly become convinced that Kinsey’s work is under appreciated.
Additionally, reading his introduction stirred in my mind an idea I’ve long had about the role of the scientist as necessarily, in its purest form, being that of the revolutionary. You see, Kinsey was facing a Goliath in his own right. Let’s ask ourselves: why was his study the first of its kind? Why were scientists so likely to conduct thorough analyses of the mating patterns of all other species of animal except for ourselves?
The answer to that question lies in the heavy presence of conditioned shame and guilt surrounding human sexual behavior. We might forget how much progress we have made as a society— for example, individuals in Kinsey’s time (around and before 1950) were being imprisoned for homosexual behaviors. Science thrives with objective analysis, unfettered from personal bias or taste. The heavy religious and social dogma surrounding sexuality had, to that point, made such objective analysis near impossible without facing heavily ostracism and condemnation (which Kinsey did, as a matter of fact, face).
The Goliath Kinsey faced was the social dogma surrounding human sexual behavior. At that point, such dogma was so heavily ingrained and pervasive that previous scientists had found it extraordinarily difficult to get honest answers from participants, even with the promise of anonymity, because of the immense shame surrounding such topics. To admit to homosexual behavior could have meant the end of one’s life as they knew it, either literally or figuratively (such as in social ostracism, the loss of one’s job, friends, family, etc.).
Kinsey, in his introduction to Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, makes it abundantly clear that he is fully aware of the Goliath he is up against. He cites a pattern seen throughout history in which the discoveries a scientist may make directly contradict that of the existing social, religious, and cultural institutions of their time. He references, for example, the pushback that the heliocentric theory and its proponents met, demonstrating that some of the most crucial of scientific discoveries are necessarily revolutionary in their character. He similarly references the theory of evolution and the threat that posed to existing religious institutions.
You might have already drawn the connection this has to the archetype of Aquarius. Aquarius, the revolutionary — Aquarius, forward-looking — Aquarius, scientific. I cite the research of Gaequelin in the connection between Saturn — ruling Aquarius traditionally — and that of the scientist. From astrologer.com:
“Gauquelin’s research detected statistically abnormal diurnal positions of the planet Mars at birth in athletes, Jupiter in actors, Saturn in scientists and the Moon in writers.”
I consider Aquarius, traditionally ruled by Saturn, to be the zodiac sign perhaps the most related to science. Obviously, being an Aquarius doesn’t mean someone is going to be a scientist; rather, the archetype of Aquarius possibly could find some of its best expression through the role of the scientist.
So, now, let us review what we’ve covered: some of the most important scientific research is revolutionary in character, having the potential to upend existing ideologies and social institutions. Saturn, traditionally ruling Aquarius, has been empirically (though I admittedly have not looked into his methods to determine the validity of his experiment) demonstrated to be associated with the scientist. The archetype of Aquarius is that of the revolutionary.
Kinsey’s work was revolutionary in character and was an immense contribution to the advancement of equal rights for individuals of all sexual orientations. He met backlash for his work (as any revolutionary scientist may).
Aquarius, it appears, may be related to the advancement of human knowledge itself and the upending of existing social institutions (a Saturn key phrase). I believe science is most associated with Aquarius. I believe science itself, in its purest form, is revolutionary. It may revolutionize existing social institutions. Those who champion the taboo in the name of progress and reason may be the most likely to face ostracism, condemnation, and backlash, a Saturnian experience.
Notable quotations from Kinsey’s work:
“Such protest at the scientific invasion of a field which has hitherto been considered the province of moral philosophers is nothing new in the history of science. There was a day when the organization of the universe, and the place of the earth, the sun, the moon, and the stars in it, were considered of such theologic import that the scientific investigation of those matters was bitterly opposed by the ruling forces of the day.”
“There is an honesty in science which refuses to accept the idea that there are aspects of the material universe that are better not investigated, or better not known, or the knowledge of which should not be made available to the common man. There are, for instance, in this age, those who believe that it would have been better if we had never learned what we now know concerning atomic structure. One might be led to believe that there was something unique in the situation which atomic research has produced. But the history of science records that similar objections were raised as each new revolutionary discovery was made. It is, moreover, the record of science that greater knowledge, as it has become available, has increased man’s capacity to live happily with himself and with his fellow men. We do not believe that the happiness of individual men, and the good of the total social organization, is ever furthered by the perpetuation of ignorance.
“There is an honesty in science which leads to a certain acceptance of the reality. There are some who, finding the ocean an impediment to the pursuit of their designs, try to ignore its existence. If they are unable to ignore it because of its size, they try to legislate it out of existence, or try to dry it up with a sponge. They insist that the latter operation would be possible if enough sponges were available, and if enough persons would wield them.
“There is no ocean of greater magnitude than the sexual function, and there are those who believe that we would do better if we ignored its existence, that we should not try to understand its material origins, and that if we sufficiently ignore it and mop at the flood of sexual activity with new laws, heavier penalties, more pronouncements, and greater intolerances, we may ultimately eliminate the reality. The scientist who observes and describes the reality is attacked as an enemy of the faith, and his acceptance of human limitations in modifying that reality is condemned as scientific materialism. But we believe that an increased understanding of the biologic and psychologic and social factors which account for each type of sexual activity may contribute to an ultimate adjustment between man’s sexual nature and the needs of the total social organization.”
THE CLOSET MYSTIC 