Tagged: marriage
Some Thoughts On Vindictive Little Hussy Tamar in Genesis, the One that Played the Harlot (Not Absalom’s Sister Who Was Raped).
My wife uses the Bible to argue with me. Anyone else have a woman like this at home? It’s wonderful.
Just this morning she brought up “Judas son of Jacob”, from which I can only assume she meant (talk to text doesn’t work well for those with heavy accents) Judah. We’re already in funny-land with this, as it clearly demonstrates why surnames ever came to be. Who? Judas? Which Judas? NT Judas? Iscariot? Oh, Jacob’s son? Oh, Judah. You mean Judah? Judah, son of Jacob? Judah Jacobson. Judah Ben Jacob. Ha.
Anyhow. So the story has it that Judah’s first son, Er Judah-son, is killed by Yahweh for being evil. Par for the course. And his second son, Onan, is unwilling that his biological son become his older brother’s heir and so he will not consummate the deed. Yahweh kills him, too.
Only then do we learn the full nature of the issue. It seems Judah has this idea, perhaps divinely inspired, perhaps not, and holds to it like his last breath, that Tamar (Er’s wife) is owed a son by one of his (Judah’s) sons. So he promises Tamar that when Shelah Judah-son grows big, he can donate his seed to the common cause.
Here’s where the story gets interesting, and not just in Azeem’s, “How did your uneducated kind ever take Jerusalem?” sense.
Er’s widow Tamar (Tamar has no surname, so “Er’s widow Tamar” will have to suffice…for now) hears that Judah Jacob-son is going on a trip. It is this moment of the story that deserves grave attention. Here is the focus of this exegesis.
So she removed her widow’s garments from herself and covered herself with a veil and wrapped herself. And she sat at the entrance of Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah; for she saw that Shelah had grown up, and she had not been given to him as a wife.
“For she saw that Shelah [Judah-son] had grown up, AND she had not been given to him as a wife.”
“Vindictive little hussy” Tamar sounds more appropriate than “Er’s widow Tamar” at this point. But let’s read on.
Judah, now a widower and past the time of mourning, apparently still gets the itch. So when he sees a harlot on his trip, he begins to negotiate. Unlike, or perhaps exactly like, men from every corner and age of the planet, he didn’t think ahead and so now he is stuck. “1. Get laid but have to give her my ID to hold until I can find my darn credit card.” Or “B. Don’t get laid.”
He gives her his ID.
She takes it, gives herself to him, and then runs, never to be seen again—even after he finds his credit card.
But this, to most illiterate preachers, is still merely the setup for the punchline of the story.
(Let’s pause here for an apropos Uncle Remus saying: “You can hide the fire, but wha choo gunna do bout da smoke?!”)
Vindictive Little Hussy Tamar is soon “showing” and the affronted Judah Jacob-son wants her burned.
She wants to live and so offers Judah Jacob-son his ID back.
The next killer-line is:
And Judah recognized them and said, “She is more righteous than I, inasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shelah.”
Oh, the qualifier.
We almost had a perplexing, a-historical, fantasy account on our hands. Without the qualifier, we might have real evidence that scripture is flawed, uninspired, and not the Word of God that we all believe it to be.
So thank the LORD and his precious son, Jesus, for the qualifier.
Judah Jacob-son does not elevate Vindictive Little Hussy Tamar unreservedly, no. That would be the work of the uninspired Woke mob, post-#metoo and George Floyd and all.
Instead, since we’re reading the Word of God—which was written by men who lived thousands of years ago at a time before Jesus fulfilled Yahweh’s plan—there is a qualifier.
Nowhere does the story suggest that Vindictive Little Hussy Tamar was righteous full-stop, but it does convey that Judah Jacob-son now recognized that he hadn’t fulfilled his vow. Or as Apollo Creed says, “Some people gotta learn the hard way!”
Granted, I still have no idea why my boo brought this up in the argument over the kids’ clothes today. And granted I honestly am not 100% certain I analyzed the right story, since “Judas son of Jacob” is not certainly “Judah Jacob-son.” But these are some thoughts on Tamar, the eency-weency-bit-more-righteous woman than the John, Judah Jacob-son, little horn-dog that he was.
My Culture, A Review of Zombieland Double Tap, by Ruben Fleischer
Certain parts of life are incapable of being explained within the remaining time, and yet too important to be ignored—those parts are culture. I realized this a short while into my marriage to a woman not of my culture when I kept finding her seemingly unable to understand what I was doing, and for what reasons. Frustrated, I simply said, “Things are this way because it’s my culture.”
“‘My culture’,” she’ll repeat. “What is ‘my culture’?” remains her loving, if unbelieving, response in broken Engileezaynia.
Next time the situation presents itself, I will answer my wife’s surely earnest parry with, “Can you watch a movie? What am I thinking? Of course you can. So watch Zombieland Double Tap. When you understand it, then you will have your answer. Because that is my culture.”
What a great film. What a landmark.
America’s Husband
My wife doesn’t listen to me, so I think it’s time to offer my services more generally.
First, because it happened merely moments ago, wives and mothers of our great nation: you do not get to leave for your shitty job (whose money we don’t need) and have some soft “miss you” moment with the kids. That’s for the actually poor (not just the envious) and/or the single mothers who have a job or three because they don’t want their precious little babies pregnant at 16 too.
Next, we need to talk about envy. Yeah, yeah. The Ten Commandments forbid envy. But it was uninspired men who clarified the problem with envy. The problem is not what happens on the inside of the envious. Envy is a problem because of what the envious do as their life’s main work: sabotage.
Case in point: a wife/mother who works a shitty, low-paying job when she doesn’t have to and uses the money to keep up with the Kardashians and mega church wives. This isn’t about money. It isn’t about control. It is envy. She suffers from envy and is sabotaging the entire family—her own children most importantly.
There’s something else, you terrible wives and mothers of America. Take a first aid course. Or join Scouts. But you need to do something to stop the incessant and melodramatic overreacting to childhood.
Proceed at your own risk, reader. What you are about to read is true and terrifying.
****
So I hear J- screaming. Ag- and An- are both upstairs with him. I had just told An- to shut the bathroom door and it soon became clear that she didn’t watch out for J-’s fingers.
Next thing I know, my wife is running up the stairs as if it’s D-Day and someone just called “Corman!!”
I sat at the table, shaking my head and dreading this totally unnecessary scene.
A moment later and J- is still crying. My wife is now frantic.
I can’t completely suppress my humanity, and I am curious if there is about to be some blood or a clearly distorted digit.
I finally see the boy’s hand as my wife carries him down the stairs and into view and it is…completely normal looking.
He is still crying.
My wife has now grabbed some ice from the freezer and is trying to apply it to his hand.
J- is not having it. He is constantly ripping himself from her grip and every time the slower-moving particles approach his hand, he shrieks louder as only toddlers are wont to do.
Next, (when will it end, I wonder?) my wife grabs a towel and tries again with the ice, this time, though, insulated by a grimy kitchen towel.
From upstairs, to the kitchen table, and now the stairs, J- is holding his ground. Rather, he is running the show and displaying a sinewy—if still covered in baby fat—wile that impresses even me. Given the situation, I am compelled to believe it comes from his man-mind.
“Where is your instinct, woman?!” I finally erupt. “He doesn’t want the ice. He isn’t hurt. Why would you keep fighting against him?”
Catechizing rabbits.
“How about this? I’ll stop if you can answer a question. What does ice do?”
Crickets.
“J-.”
The boy stops crying (face is still a slobbery mix of tears and snot and spit) at the sound of reason and calm.
“J- just go downstairs and play.”
He turns.
“Or if you want to go upstairs and play with your trains, that’s fine too.”
He chooses trains and heads up the stairs, hands and feet in action.
Pause the story here and ask yourself, “Why would the mother not worship her husband and the father at this point?”
Back to the story.
“Nag nag nag.” (I honestly don’t remember what she said.)
“What does the ice do?”
And now, as typical, she believes I am belittling her in front of the kids and fires off on that accord.
I turn to A- (who had apparently taken a seat beside me at the table to enjoy the show) and say, “Ice reduces swelling.”
A- turns to her mom and begins, “Momma, ic-.”
I stop her. “No, A-. I am teaching you.”
****
What, wives, in the hell are you thinking ice does? You saw some doctor use it once? Does it cure COVID?
In short, my beloveds, I will not feel bad for being aware that you can somehow look past a screaming child in order to apply, what to you, is merely an old wives’ tale remedy to a non-injury.
I Need Security: Harmless Stupid vs. Insecure Stupid
Everyone knows there is a distinction between “stupid” and “ignorant”. The main difference being “stupid people who mean well” are different than “stupid people”. And we call “stupid people who mean well” “ignorant”.
In my experience, I have come to see one other division of the general category of “stupid”. I see “harmless stupid” as most humor and silly assumptions that do not negatively affect life, even if they do hinder success. One example of this that comes to mind is misattributing cause and effect—not ignorantly—but harmlessly. Like when the regularly scheduled sprinkler system goes off during the outdoor church service and people attribute it to the devil doing devil things. They aren’t ignorant of the situation, they just are stupid.
Different from this kind of stupid is the kind which causes insecurity in life. One easy example of this would be alcoholic parents. They may be great parents most of the time, but the weekly or monthly instances of uncontrollable outbursts or whatever particular scenes unfold (kids trying to wake up passed-out parents etc.) leads to insecurity in life.
With me? Make sense?
Routine, even if for harmlessly stupid reasons, is still secure. “Every Monday after dinner my parents drove exactly the number of miles as the calendar date. I never understood why. Still don’t. But we got ice cream afterwords and it was fun overall.” That’s a bizarre and stupid routine, but it is not problematic.
Put another way, and to get to the point of this post, I value security over intelligence.
Moreover, I do not believe that stupidity is necessarily insecure.
What I am not certain about is if I am actually right. All I know today is that I need security.
My wife hails from one of the most uneducated regions, continents, and countries on the Earth. While dating, I noted many harmlessly stupid comments and observations. (This was/is not too different than any other day, or any other interaction with folks.)
Little anecdotes about “everyone there believes all Americans are rich” were cute to hear and even carried an air of “why would they believe otherwise if the only source was Hollywood films?” intentionally-sympathetic soundness. Couple this with the fact that no educated American wants to admit the reality that, “What you just said is completely without thought at a level that is beyond ignorance and evidences some mixture of mental laziness and legitimate inability to think”—especially if the conversant is BIPOC.
To be clear—I have witnessed first-hand many, many American friends hear my wife tell the same anecdotes and they all respond the same way, ie, no one calls out what each of us plainly hears. And why not?
I cannot answer for anyone but myself, and my no-call was because I believed there was harmless stupidity.
But the other kind, the stupidity which leads to insecurity, that is now something I am dealing with every day. And I don’t know how to right the ship. I don’t know how to course correct.
Readers might offer advice about the big things, like kindness, compassion, empathy. And I wanted to believe those exist, but have slowly been convinced that those are culturally-based postures and so the problem in this culture-clash-called-my-family is not resolved.
So far, my solution has been to try “let’s start with truth” and go from there. “Could we agree to say true things?” But the language barrier is such that even this seemingly simple request relies tremendously on ignoring reality and relying on hopeful intentions.
He said: “What did you buy?”
She said: “Groceries.”
So far so good.
He said: “What is this item?”
She said: “Oh, underwear.”
Setback.
He said: “In your culture is ‘underwear’ in the same category as ‘food and soap’ and other things that we use up?”
She said: “It’s wrong to buy underwear now?!!”
So even something as supposedly universal as “truth” seems out of reach.
Of course, the easy solution is to resign. To simply not care. To “let go and let God”. To choose a “non-fighting” version of “peace” as the higher ground in every moment of every day. But the problem with that is I tell the truth. I don’t tell it in a “I’m just keeping it one hundred” provocateur kinda way (mostly not at least). I just need my words to mean things, and I need my kids to mean the same things when they say the same words.
In other words, I need security.
Report Cards in 2024: Grandparents Don’t Know—But Now You Do

I want to homeschool my step-son. His mother wants him to go to school. Naturally, she wins.
Here’s the rub. I actually do care about the boy. I actually do know that he has a bright future ahead of him—economically and in the ability to become fully man. I actually do want him to have a good life—something totally within his grasp as both an American and as my step-son. But especially as my step-son.
The image above is from his first report card (of course it not called that anymore—one up-vote for truth) at this new school.
I speak and read (and write) English very well. In fact, my communication abilities are excellent, as you can surely tell. Furthermore, I believe that I understand and can explain to you what this image states about my step-son.
Because of that, I know with certainty that it does not tell me anything about how my step-son is performing. According to this document, there is no standard. There is no benchmark. There is no measure.
This document is worse than a teacher grading on a curve to pass the class rather than admitting failure and reteaching the concept. It is also worse than just failing the students and dealing with whatever consequence is already designated in the rulebooks.
As an American, and former military officer, what really pisses me off though is how the document seems to indicate some amount of success to folks that cannot read English—vis-à-vis his mother.
The catalyst for this post is that the human bloggers who sometimes read my posts likely have not seen this type of performance document. They hear about climate change, CRT, book banning, soft standards, social justice, and all the other hot button cable news cycle topics which fall under the “education” umbrella. But they do not see or hear that the real problem is actually much worse. They do not see that there is actually no measure of performance anymore. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
Keep in mind, to be clear, I am not claiming that this is a case of “the blind leading the blind”. Or “stupid is as stupid does”. I am pointedly claiming that this is knowingly wrong. It would be better if the school did what “developing” countries (third world) do and just gives “A’s” to everyone, regardless of performance, with the reasoning that an A is the best grade, so it must be desirable.
The American Black Church has a proverb you can hear from the pulpit almost every Sunday: “People who know better, do better.”
The American Education system resoundingly proves that that proverb is merely trite, wishful thinking. In fact, the schools prove it is a stupid saying. The teachers’ proverb is, “People who know better, submit without resistance.”
Because You’re Not a Moron
Thinking about any one child of mine (see earlier post today) naturally causes my thoughts to return to H-.
Want to know what some folks advise? I wish I was kidding. There are, supposedly, well-educated and well-trained men and women in the business of divorce that suggest, “Send cards and letters over the next 5 years or so at least for birthdays and holidays etc. That way, when she is 18 and maybe thinks differently and is free to do as she pleases, she won’t be able to (fact-check-proof) say, ‘You never even…’”
As I receive this advice, I always poo poo it, saying agreeably, “Yeah. I know. Of course I will.” But that’s a lie. Not the part about whether or not I will use the USPS to attempt to parent, but the part about my belief that it somehow works. My kid, H-, would have to be some kind of moron to think, “Oh, he actually did love me,” because she received some one dozen articles of mail each year for five years.
Seriously, can you imagine an adult woman falling in love with a man who did the same?
“But he sent me a Hallmark card every major holiday!!” the imaginary imbecile woman’s response to friends, after they chide her for ever having confessed that she nursed a dream of real relationship with a pen pal.
That woman would be a moron!!
And so would H- if the greeting card thing had any effect, by my thinking. And I’m not looking to raise morons here. Marry them? Yup. Divorce them? Yup. Produce them? Nope.
I have far too much hope placed on H-’s inborn ability to get to the bottom of the situation before she turns 18 (or after, for that matter) to waste any on the experts’ advice.
No, to be clear, the truth still lay where it always has.
After 12+ years of rocky, but never hopeless co-parenting (and more money transfers than sanity permits to reckon, both in total dollars and percentage of income), H- has recently been kidnapped by her mom (and any others over there who don’t actively work for H-’s freedom). Right now she has developed Stockholm Syndrome, which, when put plainly as if for 14 yr olds, means: she prefers the company and agenda of her kidnapper—despite the crime—than the terror that she now surely believes, wrongly, comes with freedom and knowing the truth.
Oh. And her mom is a money-grubbing whore. Always has been and always will be. The future for H- will include a realization of all this, followed by a tepid-at-first, then common-to-perhaps-loving-even return to me (including apologizing for ever doubting), plus a daily and disastrous relationship with her mother that is anything but encouraged by little ol’ me after said realization. Then, maybe later, the two will talk it out through the glass on those phones at a prison—as her mom is locked up for the what is illegal in the future—the general crime of allowing a heart of absolute moral blackness to continue to pump blood throughout her body.
(The fantasy sustains me; what do you want me to say?)
****
Post recap: Don’t be a moron. Cards and gifts alone could only ever serve as “Exhibit A” of the dysfunction and moral crimes you live under.
I Have Two and a Half Other Children
It’s true. I have two and a half other children besides H-. I barely write about them on here. I think I have written about my step-son (he makes up the “half”), A-, the most, and I can recall writing one post about my other daughter, A-. I do not believe I have mentioned my son, J-. If I had to guess, I believe I don’t mention him because he, unsurprisingly, carries all my hopes and dreams. I think I’m trying to say, with my son, that it’s the same as how we don’t tell the birthday wish after we blow out the candles. You won’t get a chance to know him on here. Only time will tell if you have the opportunity in real life.
But I have written a whole series of posts, generally categorized, ‘The Daughter Project’, about H-. And my last post was not just written about her, but to her. (Though in it I did write some facts about her ((that she has been kidnapped by her mother)) as I pleaded with her to “wake up”. Upon consideration of that post’s purpose and this blog’s content as a whole, I found myself almost motivated to rename the blog once again, this time to something like, “Revelatory Blog Posts from One of the Many Divorced American Dad’s Who Desire to Father Their Children on the Topic of ‘How Vicious Women Can Be as Measured by How Absolutely Impotent Her Ex is from Stopping Her Heinous Moral Crimes Against Their Child’, Among Other Interesting Musings.” But given how few blogs are actually written by humans (not AI), and how few of those are written by men, and how few of those are updated with any regularity by men doing anything other than expressing bitterness, I realized, “Pete’s Blog” pretty much does the same job–and it’s much easier to remember.
I want to tell you something I have never written about on here.
I want to tell you what I believe is the real beef between her and I.
Aaron Sorkin, the Hollywood writer/director, offers writer’s the tip, “Each line of dialogue should be an attack. And every argument is always about something beneath whatever the stated topic is.” (I’m paraphrasing.) I really like that. I like it because it is clear and easy to follow for writers, and I like it because I believe it is true. Sure, some folks may not always attack, and some folks may legitimately be superficial, but these folks clearly are missing out on the good parts of life.
I can only imagine what my ex tells her family and friends as she describes her crimes. Everyone loves playing defense these days, so it wouldn’t surprise me if all she said was, “I have loved him from the moment I heard there was a ‘big white guy’ in the studio. I really do want him to play a role in H-‘s life,” and subsequently the whole room always rushed to her aide.
For my part, when I talk about my ex-wife’s crimes against me and our daughter, the general response I get is, “I hate when people use the kids against each other,” and, “That sucks that she is using your daughter to hurt you.” As the respondent begins, I always take careful note to learn if anyone is willing to enter the fray and claim that either of the adults (me or her) need a defense or to be attacked to my face. Nope. They do not. Instead they stick to the fairly obvious and fairly neutral, “DON’T HURT CHILDREN!!” claim in all its agreeableness and wisdom. In other words, people–even friends, especially friends–do not attack her, or defend me. Truth be told, as I candidly mentioned last post, if my family and friends do any attacking, it is against me for writing and posting these stupid posts. Aside from that, the only human being who certainly is attacking anyone (outside of me and my nightly imprecatory prayers to the Most High God, Yahweh Elohim–ineffective as they are) is my ex. And she is only attacking H-.
On to it, on to the raison d’etre of this post. I told you that besides informing ya’ll about my family demographics that may not always come across and I like to believe may have a softening effect on the man behind the blog, I wanted to take a moment and describe, for H-‘s sake, what I imagine is the “real” fight/argument between her mom and I. I want to take a moment, crazy as it may be, to reveal my best guess as to what her mom really has had beef with for at least this past 11 years of being divorced. Ready, H-? Ready, dear reader?
H-‘s mom, unlike me, really loved me. As in, she really wanted to not be divorced from me.
Three clues that lead me to this conclusion.
Firstly, when we were in front of the judge for the first and only time we both appeared together in a court room, even he, the judge, commented how well we seemed to get along. I was, naturally, unconcerned with truth and just doing whatever my instincts instructed would be the winning action/speech to get the hell out of there alive. In the moment, I assumed K- was doing the same. Like a traffic stop on steroids. Survive. That’s the goal. But then one of the weirdest moments of all my life occurred in the elevator down, which we, for some reason, got into at the same time. K- said to me, “Well, who knows? Maybe we’ll get remarried.” I knew then, by the speed of the transition of the look on her face from hope to hate, that without a doubt I wear my feelings on my sleeve.
Secondly, I can’t take sole credit for developing this imaginary scenario of mine. One of the only people to truly listen and try to figure out how someone could still care enough to keep pursuing the crime after seven years was the first to state it. This co-worker said something like, “She must have really been hurt.”
My immediate reaction was like, “What do you mean? Hurt by what? Hurt by who? Me?” It’s actually a bit daunting to consider what I saw as the conclusion of this co-worker’s assertion. I started thinking, that my ex-wife–miserable, vindictive wench that she is–actually loved me and wanted to remain married to me or get remarried to me despite all the unpleasantness of our 6+ year marriage. All the more daunting because I just never did. I had even said, “If it doesn’t work, we can just get divorced,” casually on or near the day I proposed.
I have never been one to hide my faults. I have never been one to deny my sins. And I suspect this is where I am different from most people. I have no problem baldly saying, “I never really loved you. I never really cared about you. There were many outside variables–most of which stemmed from my view of sexual union–that led to my proposal.” I just don’t shy away from confessing shameful things like that. “Let’s get the truth in the air and then figure out the path forward” has always been my modus operandi.
Keep in mind, I also believe that “let’s get the truth in the air” is what is happening all day long by our actions. The distinction I draw or ask for help in drawing is that I believe we should intentionally match our words to our actions. K- was no happy wife/mother. She still isn’t. Her actions said so and say so.
Thirdly, the final piece of the puzzle that assures me that my imaginary world of her “love” for me and wish to remarry is the fact that she got remarried, only after I did. The difference, of course, is that I barely dated–and never lived with a girlfriend for the 6+ years between divorce and wedding. Slow down and read that again. I had 6 years of living alone–and after trying some dating for the first 3 years of renewed bachelorhood–was single for the next 3 until I met my current wife. And we did not live together until we were married. My ex, on the other hand, continued where she left off back when I became her bankbook of the hour. Since our separation, a year before the divorce was final, she had live-in boyfriend after live-in boyfriend. As much as I can cherry pick all the disastrous women I have heard of and conclude that I disdain the female sex in its entirety, believe me when I say that I am well aware that the male is equally as terrible. What kind of man moves in with a single mother–a single mother collecting child support and kidnapping the child as if the father, me, is on the penal farm? Horrible men, that’s who. Tried and true “mother effers”. It’s in the name, folks. But she found them and invited them in. Yet, she wouldn’t marry them, or they didn’t ask, or she didn’t pressure them to ask with the “get the milk from the cow for free” BS that made me feel guilty all these many years ago.
But she loves me still. And I don’t love her at all, never did.
That is the underlying disagreement that all the surface dialogue attacks about child support and parenting time is truly about.
****
What do you think, H-? In your almost 14 year old wisdom, does every marriage have to be based on love? And does every divorce have to be based on equitable lack of love? And do empirical facts have any role to play in determining what love is?
Finally, H-, I’d love to hear how you justify your treatment (or lack thereof) of A-, A-, and J-, otherwise known as your ‘brothers and sister’. Do you know that I barely say your name around them anymore, to protect them? Is that what you want? Or are you gonna reengage sometime soon and I can remind them of their big sister? For what it’s worth, J- is so young and promising that he probably won’t display any care, taking the wisest of stances if/when he decides to speak about it. Something like, “I always figured things would change when the right situation presented itself.” So while you two need each other, the age and gender gap is just too big anyhow. I will tell you, though, that taken together with how much your mom is hurting you, you’re doubly losing by not having A- in your life. I can already see that. She has so much love and energy to give. The four of us can’t receive it all. So please start using your grey matter and come back to us.
What will you do?
Wake Up, H-. You’re Being Lied to by Your Mother.
It really bothers me that my choice of wife has resulted in the kidnap of my daughter. These days, I think it probably best to say “kidnap/runaway.” I think the addition of runaway better reveals the indifference and poor parenting involved. We’re not talking about a fairy tale here. We’re talking about years long moral crimes by mothers and all who support them.
Coming a close second to the fact of physical separation and the resultant lack of influence by yours truly is the absolute nonsense behind the idea that I, me, have any responsibility for the situation. Let me be clear: I don’t cause these crimes.
Not only have I done nothing (ever) that any reasonable person would think indicates that I don’t want to raise or can’t raise or shouldn’t raise my daughter, I have only ever acted with the intent to raise my daughter. Do you know how easy it would be to quit these days?
My intent is evident all the way from the fact that I have a job down to the fact that I have never—not ever—suggested that her mom not get time to raise her. She’s your kid too, dummy! Of course you get the chance to screw her up like your parents screwed you up!
Physiological effects surface by just typing this description of the perverse nature of the situation: a mother kidnapping her daughter from the father while stealing his money to foot the mealticket and nearly every single witness, the judge, and the jury look away. Does God?
It bothers me.
Did I ever mention on here that despite thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars being stolen by H-’s mom that when I finally saw H- again, she was wearing socks with more than one hole in them? That they were thin as tissue?
Do you see the three-fold problem with that, dear reader? First, no one over there has thought to teach her self-respect. Second, “Buy the kid some friggin’ socks!” And third, “Pay attention to your kid’s socks!”
Why is my daughter clothed like a pauper when the money you steal should have her keeping up with the Kardashians? Or do you work for me and not have money left over for H-? I wonder what your husband thinks of his benfactor? Sounds fun. Maybe someday his balls will drop.
The great flaw of Christianity, if it can be called that, is exemplified by the following question that constantly circles my situation. The folks who put this question to me usually preface it with, “Now don’t get upset, but…”
The question is, “Is there anything you are doing to cause this situation?”
I want to answer them, “Uh, yeah. Tons of things. Like, breathing. And eating. And putting one foot in front of the other. The other day I turned on the water; I think that had something to do with it,” but instead an anger of the hottest kind boils over into, “I AM NOT CAUSING THIS!! IT IS NOT A SITUATION WHICH IS AN EFFECT OF A CAUSE!!” (That use of capital letters is meant to convey yelling in the most passionate rage.)
Some people, it seems, live on a planet where there is a balance book, a zero sum world. In their world, if you help an old lady across the street a couple times as a kid, then your future ex-wife is morally grounded, narrowly avoiding the ever-present call all women face to embody a virulent waif. On the other hand, if you discard every instinct and signal your body sends, in favor of optimism, and accordingly marry someone (whose action of leaning over in her car, as the two of you drive separately from her job to the restaurant of your first date, is, you later find out, for the purpose of taking a hit of weed), divorce her later before the madness spirals totally out of control, and write—with uncommon voice, vocabulary, and velocity—both how you feel about the State you served’s defense of a mother’s right to kidnap and neglect a child, rob the father, and that she never once, not once, ever, never ever supports herself (or her daughter) financially, then it’s open season on you.
Sorry, Bible-believers, but if you really thought that “choice of spouse” was that important, then that should’ve been the end of the matter and we can forget about the whole Gospel thing.
But you and I both know that life is about much more than marriage and family relationships, don’t we? That’s right. We do.
The thing, in short, is this.
Every bone in my body tells me I am right, tells me my way of seeing—not everything—but this situation is reality.
I would be betraying myself, I have betrayed myself, by giving time and action to the notion that I somehow, in some way, play a role in the situation. That is simply not true. It is an untenable option.
I want my daughter, I have always wanted my daughter, and I have done nothing to push her away from me. Never. Even the divorce was my way of trying to save her from experiencing her mother for at least some of her childhood—exactly half, if I had my way.
Instead, all my efforts have dropped me off on soil where I am the one who never sees H-.
This bothers me. It depresses me. It makes me want to quit. Quit with a capital Q. I feel like ending all effort and just vegging out on the couch in front of the tv. No more work, no more parenting my other kids. No more reading. No more piano. No more nuthin’. Just leave me alone.
But I persist. I persevere.
Why? Because if I was H-, and this daydream may be my fatal flaw, if I was H-, then I would want to know that I had experienced violence at the hands of the only person I trusted. In other words, if I was H-, I would want to know I had been kidnapped.
I would want to know.
****
Half the reason I am motivated to “keep on, keepin’ on” in life is the quest to find reality. What is real? Put differently, am I alone?
Reality for me, I guess, means peace. It means evidence of order—irrespective of feelings. Reality is not the chaos caused by passions. Most importantly, reality is worth fighting for.
Am I really a deadbeat dad, deemed by society as unworthy of raising my own child? Is that the reality? Am I really some maladjusted, bitter, and just plain mean terrorist of a man, being justly punished for an unending reign of terror—but a man who is always one moment away from changing his ways to the reward of being reunited with his daughter? Is that reality?
Or, or, or, are those and other grandiose fantasies being perpetuated from every angle with all intensity upon an unsuspecting teenage girl who finds herself bound by a seemingly unbreakable spell made up of an unrelenting dark web of lies and half-truths cast by her own mother?
Reality, for me, is the latter. But H- is the one who must decide. So I persist. Because she is my daughter and worth fighting for.
Her Idle Hands
In an EMS job (I just learned this during some yearly recurrent CBT), you have to be ready to respond at a moment’s notice. It can make things like “eating” difficult. For example, yesterday I was grazing successfully for the first six hours of the shift, and then boom!, got a call at 3pm, and upon completion of that one, almost having returned to base, got a follow-on call that kept me out until 1059pm. That’s eight hours, folks. Luckily, I carry two Clif Bars, (one regular, one protein) on my person and a Gatorade in the aircraft. Simply put, I survived. (Didn’t even have to crack open the protein one.)
Another aspect of the job is that you leave the office in disarray, not having time to properly cleanup when the call drops. That’s the stimulus for this post.
I was in the middle of some Psalm reading when the call came, the second and third Psalms.
I didn’t really think about leaving the open Bible for my counterpart pilot to see when he came on shift while I was out, but when I got back to the office, after my truly heroic effort to impose security and peace of mind on the public, I saw it again and couldn’t help but wonder if he snuck a peek. He probably didn’t.
But I like to daydream and the following is my daydream.
****
“I saw you were reading the Psalms, Pete. Did you leave that for me to see? You trying to convert me?”
“Ha. No. I don’t think it happens like that. And I can’t say I knew whether or not you were redeemed until just this moment.”
“Touché.”
Pause.
Then he began again, “Why do you read that book? I don’t see the point.”
“Well, it’s like this. First, it’s true. Jesus really is Yahweh, the God of the Bible, in the flesh. And the Son of God. And ‘Ya’ll need Jesus’ as the meme goes. All that is true. But the reason for reading it is best put like this.
“You know my ex wife kidnapped my daughter, right? I’ve mentioned as much, yes?”
“Yup.”
“Can you help me get her back?”
“Uh. Seriously? Or hypothetically? I mean, you know that I am ready to rock’n’roll Taken-style, just say the word.”
“Nice. But without using force. Can you help me?”
“I don’t see how I could. So no.”
“I agree. You can’t help. Don’t feel bad. I’m making a bigger point. Here are the facts. My parents can’t help either. My wife can’t help. My children can’t help. I have no friends who can help. Mediation can’t help. Lawyers, even if they persuade the judge, aren’t ‘enforcement’, and so they can only help on paper. And the Judge also isn’t enforcement, and so he/she can only wish to help. Finally, no law enforcement actually has time or concern to help. It isn’t exactly prime optics to yank kids out of one of their parent’s arms—not to mention domestic disturbance calls are known escalate so quick that no one is interested in being around for the fireworks, regardless of the principles and titles involved.”
“When you put it that way, I do not envy you.”
“Thanks. In any case, I hope you see why I might read the Psalms. Forget Jesus for a minute. Forget history. Forget all the nonsense we chatted about a few weeks ago regarding the misconceptions of the Bible being translations of translations etc. Just listen to this,
He who sits in the heaven laughs, the Lord scoffs at them.
“And,
I lay down and slept; I awoke, for Yahweh sustains me.
“When I see the world, when I see my little situation and extrapolate it out to others’ situations and even the biggest situations, like wars and such, I cannot find any hope. I mean that I despair. Truly. You don’t want to know. But these words—the idea they hold—the idea that the powers I see are not the highest powers, well, these words become my hope and my prayer.
“‘LORD: for whatever reason, there is no hope down here. In a tone familiar to you, ‘None can help me, no not one’. Can you? Will you? Prove yourself.’
“That’s why I read the Bible.”
“Hmm. I can’t say I will get there from here, but I hope it works. Let me know, will ya?”
“I doubt I could stop updating you even I wanted to. Ha.”
****
On the topic, do you want to hear what the mediator (would’ve thought he was supposed to maintain neutrality…) actually had the balls to say to me? He said, “I did want to tell you that I applaud you for trying so hard to stay in your daughter’s life.”
What does one do with that betrayal?
Umm…thanks? I mean, the only thing I ever did to “leave” my daughter was determine that kids cost money, and then apply for a job, accept the position, and go to work as scheduled. I will never understand how that has resulted in “losing” my daughter. Seriously, her mom has literally never worked full time in the last 18 years. Think about that. And the result is the kidnapping of a child, robbing me, and unilaterally influencing our daughter? Idle hands are the devil’s playground, after all, it seems.
LORD: for whatever reason, there is no hope down here. None can help me, no not one. Can you? Will you? Prove yourself.
Marriage and Family: Arty D vs. Louie Lah vs. C Frazier, A Corner-Joint Review of “Through the Magic Door”, “Passin’ Through”, and “Cold Mountain”, by the Aforementioned Three Greats
Sir Doyle’s book is a must-read for book lovers with a personal library (or bookshelf), but definitely can be skipped by all others. The best moments of it are of the nature of the best moments of all of life, which is to say, the best moments are those in which we unwittingly reveal our core beliefs. For this knight, it comes out in his statements about the barbarians or uncivilized (or the like) that still exist today, but of course we stopped labeling them as such pretty much when the likes of Doyle died.
Mr. L’Amour’s book was exactly what you would expect for an author whose works have sold over 300 million copies worldwide.
And then we come to Mr. Frazier’s masterpiece. Oddly, I first heard of Cold Mountain when in the USAF’s OTS in Alabama after college (you need a degree to be a US military officer, and need to be an officer to be a pilot), and had arranged the third of three terribly awkward and resoundingly terminal “let’s meet up since we spent so much time playing SOCOM together online” rendez-vous’. This online pal was a professor’s assistant or something and so I figured it couldn’t be too weird. And it wasn’t. But the only movie worth seeing after grabbing a bite was Cold Mountain. I figured it looked kinda like Braveheart, so I was a bit surprised how it felt so “Notebook-ee” when viewing with a veritable stranger. Not that I regret the meetup. Live and learn, I say.
I watched the movie later in life for whatever reason and fell in love with it. I bought the piano music even. I even, while in Denver, tracked down a “Sacred Harp” group and used to traipse all the way to it when I could, carrying H- in tow. I probably posted about that actually. H- was adorable at those types of things back then. If you haven’t been, the dozen or so participants sit facing each other in a square. And one person stands in the middle and leads the acapella singing, using a particular and simple arm movement to keep everyone on time. When it was H-’s turn, without blinking or thinking, she just stood up and went to the middle, arm at the ready. So funny and instructional. Form the kids, I say. They can do it.
That was close to a decade ago, and a dozen views of the film. As I looked for something to read with my wife (we started with “The Age of Innocence”), I picked up the book. I figured it had to be good if they made a movie. But I didn’t count on how tricky the English is. Most literate native speakers can handle it, if book sales and ticket sales mean anything, but I found that nearly every sentence contained so much meaning—and maybe just to me and my imagination—that I couldn’t read it to my wife and believe that she was following any of it. In retrospect, it was probably more the simple setting of the Civil War American South than anything else that I saw as the barrier. Try explaining the richness of that history to an alien. As I’m sure they (aliens) have—actually we all know they hold grudges longer than we of the West, how else can you explain Africa?—there is just too much passion and indignation and family, not to mention—or dare I mention—principle involved in that great war for the future of America to be captured by words. And folks who don’t interact with the land of America, just the fruits of America—in other words, “the rest of the world”—just can’t “get it”. They can’t. It’s parroting at best, and falsehood at worst.
How do the three relate? Whether Doyle had any idea he was doing so or not, the way his book ended lumped him into the category of the other two, by virtue of climaxing on the concept of marriage and family. I think Louise writes love stories because he knows women read more than men. Frazier wrote his because it was kinda family legend/history. And then Doyle somehow arrived at marriage and family because he randomly began his trek along his bookshelves at such a point that the end of his collection included Stevenson’s works, thus the platform to display awareness that Robert just chose to bypass marriage/family altogether when writing his classics. It lead to Doyle’s best line, “How many [men] go through the world without ever loving at all?”