Romantic Friendship

Dawn Of A New Era II

2011-05-28T01:53:00.000-07:00

Notice these very intimate (and modern) photos of women are all about deep, profound, touching and romanticized Friendships in the absence of sex, lust & erotica. Unbeknownst to the photographers and the ones posing for it (who thought they were taking lesbian images) were in reality, actually shooting Romantic Friendship pictures. Here are a few of my favorites:

You can view the rest of them in this breathtaking virtual animated album book I created below: http://romanticfriendship-bostonmarriage.blogspot.com/

Dawn Of A New Era I

2011-05-28T01:46:00.001-07:00

Notice these very intimate (and modern) photos of men are all about deep, profound, touching and romanticized Friendships in the absence of sex, lust & erotica. Unbeknownst to the photographers and the ones posing for it (who thought they were taking gay images) were in reality, actually shooting Romantic Friendship pictures. Here are a few of my favorites:

You can view the rest of them in this breathtaking virtual animated album book I created below: http://romanticfriendship-bostonmarriage.blogspot.com/

Sudden Inspiration

2011-05-28T01:45:00.002-07:00

After finishing my whole journal/blog (whew, it is such a wonderful masterpiece!), a sudden inspiration came to me. I might decide to write a short collection of romantic friendship & Boston marriage stories. Who knows? I could be the next Louisa May Alcott or even better; the very next Katherine Fugate (chuckles). I honestly don't think I would ever become a professional writer, motivational speaker or start some kind of radical movement in real-life. But, if I do, then it would certainly be the dawn of a (new?) era when it comes to deep intimate (and profound) romantic friendship love stories!

A Hundred Years From Now...

2011-05-28T01:45:00.001-07:00

Dear Lillian Marie,

“I read so many blogs, I read so much, and then when I need something to fill a void in my life, or a disappointing event, I read yours. I re-read. I go back and dissect the letters that form the words that form the sentences and the paragraphs. When I read your writing, I smile, I laugh, and when alone, I have cried at some of the feelings you have openly expressed in your blog. You have so profoundly affected me. I've shared with you what your writing has done for my soul. I have no idea who you are. I have only been able to piece together a quilt of something that resembles a very true, loyal, loving human being. Accolades my dear, you are so blessed."

Warm Regards,
Sue

So I can proudly say that--

A HUNDRED YEARS FROM NOW...

It won't matter
What kind of car I drove
What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank
Nor what my clothes looked like
BUT
The world may be a little better
Because, I made a special and unique difference
In the life of a human being

Memorable Blog Quotes

2011-05-28T01:44:00.001-07:00

While our sex lives have ballooned in the last hundred years, our friendships have grown stunted. ("So Are You Two Together?" June-July 2001 Article)

Ninny Threadgoode: "I found out what the secret to life is: friends. Best friends." (Fried Green Tomatoes)

In ancient times Friendship was seen as the "happiest and most fully human of all loves; the crown of life and the school of virtue." (Friendship Commitment Ceremony)

Did you know that the *dictionary definition* of Friendship in 1755 was “the highest form of intimacy”? (Friendship Commitment Ceremony)

Why does Yahoo list nearly one hundred sites on gay history but no sites on the history of friendship? (The Eternal Debate/Article 3)

No, it's not that kind of 'girl-on-girl action'. A girl crush is where you meet a woman whose sense of style or brilliant achievements or personal charisma makes you adore and worship her. (Anatomy Of A Girl Crush)

Orientations are not just limited to the "sexual" category. (Revelations II: Paradigm Shift)

Some people are married to "Jesus" (nuns and priests), some are married to their "spouses" (husbands/wives), some are married to their "jobs" (workaholics), but very few are married (or willing to marry) their "Friend." (Friendship Commitment Ceremony)

It's the what-ifs that drive many women away from closeness with each other. ("So Are You Two Together?" June-July 2001 Article)

One married woman, called Lisa, says: "If I knew I could trust a friendship with a woman — that there was a way of making a friendship into a bona fide, future-oriented relationship — I would rather have that than be married." ("So Are You Two Together?" June-July 2001 Article)

Prosecutor Percy: Why did you go with Idgie Threadgoode?
Judge: Answer the question Mrs. Bennett.
Ruth: Because she... she's the best Friend I ever had, and I love her.
(Fried Green Tomatoes)

Written by 27-year-old Zoe Zolbrod, it celebrated the passion that flashes up between women, even when they are both straight: ... "and in knowing them I would feel a rush of power and possibility, of total self, that seemed much more real to me than heterolove," Zolbrod wrote. When she met her friend V, "it was like finding the person you think you'll marry." The two moved in together. They took care of each other, became family, called each other "my love" and "my roommate" interchangeably. ("So Are You Two Together?" June-July 2001 Article)

The expectation that all “serious love relationships” should be sexual is a patriarchal notion. (Boston Marriage Definition website)

...And I understand now how precious and rare it is to feel that close to someone who isn’t also a sexual partner. (Dr.Dennison, creator of "Smart At Love" website)

...Yet in fact the passage is evidence of a belief that was once widely held in English-speaking countries but has now been largely forgotten: that romantic love need not be accompanied by erotic love. (The Eternal Debate/Article 3)

Women have been connecting in passionate friendships since the birth of our species. (Xena & Gabrielle: A Classic Revisitation Of The Romantic Friendship)

Perfectly respectable Victorian women wrote to each other in terms such as these: ‘I hope for you so much, and feel so eager for you… that the expectation once more to see your face again, makes me feel hot and feverish.’ They recorded the ‘furnace blast’ of their ‘passionate attachments’ to each other... In the nineteenth century, these sentiments were so respectable that surviving relatives often published them in elegies.... (Romantic Friendship from Wikipedia)

Bates referred to Coman as her "Joy of Life" and wrote many poems about their love. Only a few years before her death, she wrote to a friend, "So much of me died with Katharine Coman that I'm sometimes not quite sure whether I'm alive or not." (Prominent Women in Boston Marriages)

Idgie Threadgoode: "They may put "Miss" on my tombstone but as far as I am concerned I haven't missed a thing." (Fried Green Tomatoes)

In the ideal Victorian romantic friendship, although two friends could kiss, fondle each other, and hold one another all night long in sleep, there was no sex. (Xena & Gabrielle: A Classic Revisitation Of The Romantic Friendship)

These "romantic friendships" were not only common, but were considered quite normal, even "sweet", and in some instances, uplifting. (Xena & Gabrielle: A Classic Revisitation Of The Romantic Friendship)

This kind of unique relationship is my highest truth, my highest hope, my grandest dream, and my grandest vision. (A New Hope)

Women are 'brainwashed' to prefer men, to compete with other women for male recognition and love, to think of women as 'second best.' (The Psychology With Which Women Regard Other Women)

'Lesbianism' is merely a symbol of a wider taboo on female loyalty and allegiances of all kinds. (The Psychology With Which Women Regard Other Women)

Romantic friendship is renamed gay love or lesbianism because our modern notions of friendship do not allow for the possibility of friends embracing romantic activities. (The Eternal Debate/Article 3)

We have ceased to believe that it is possible for a man to deeply love another man, unless that love is sexually based. (The Eternal Debate/Article 3)

The price paid for the fear of men’s intimacy is high –– for all males, not just those who yearn for each other sexually. (Picturing Men)

"Why do adolescent boys often leave empty seats between each other when they go to the movies?" (Empty Seats)

There was a time in America when two men pictured with their arms wrapped around each other, or perhaps holding hands, weren't necessarily seen as sexually involved—a time when such gestures could be seen simply as those of intimate friendship rather than homoeroticism. (Picturing Men)

Though I'm proud to call you "Chocolate Bear," the crowd will always talk and stare. (Guy Love)

Examples of pre-modern standards of physical contact in the Gospels include John 13:23: "One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was lying close to the breast of Jesus." (Biblical Examples)

“Now it came about when [David] had finished speaking to Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself.” Then they kissed each other and wept together. (Biblical Examples)

People’s interpretation of physical contact became extraordinarily ‘privatized and sexualized,’ so that all types of touching, kissing, and holding were seen as sexual foreplay rather than accepted as ordinary means of communication that carried different meanings in different contexts... (Romantic Friendship from Wikipedia)

I have a dream that perhaps homosexuality will be a thing of the past, and that we all should adopt the prim, proper attitudes of the Victorian Era once again (and bring it back 21st century-style)!!!
(I Have A Dream)

After reading my own journal/blog from beginning to end, I found myself staring at the computer screen for a very long time, became emotional, speechless and finally, tears spilled down my cheeks. That is because I slowly came to the realization this “love” goes beyond words; goes beyond categories and labels, and goes beyond what any piece of paper can declare. Yes, the "love" I'm talking about really has no name... (Blog Author)

Romantic Friendship Quotes

2011-05-28T01:42:00.002-07:00

According to many school of thoughts located in several corners of the world, Romantic Friendship is by far the best form of Friendship that can ever exist between two individuals, either of the same or different sex. -- Blog Author

A Friend hears the song in my heart and sings it back to me when my memory fails. -- Unknown

"Ah, how I love you beyond belief, it paralyzes me. It makes me heavy with emotion.... I tremble at the thought of you. All my whole being leans out to you.... I dare not think of your arms." -- Rose Elizabeth Cleveland to her Friend Evangeline Simpson Whipple, (1890)

"Want to really look at yourself? The best mirror is an old Friend." -- George Herbert

A simple friend hears you. A good friend pays attention to you. A best friend gives you that special look. But, a Friend is the one who soul gazes into your eyes. -- Blog Author

"A Friend may well be reckoned the masterpiece of nature." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Simple friends casually chat together. Good friends have real genuine conversations. Best friends talk about anything under the sun. But, it is Friends who discuss the most sensitive stuff, talk about the most private matters, ask the most intimate questions, say the most risky things, ponder on the most uncomfortable subjects, and delve deep into each others' weird inner worlds that nobody else knows about. -- Blog Author

I've learned that you can love a Friend with as much intensity as a lover; even surpassing it. -- Blog Author

"One loyal Friend is worth ten thousand relatives." -- Euripides (408 B.C.)

"Who finds a good Friend, finds a treasure." -- Jewish Saying

A true loving Friend promises you, “I will never be the iceberg to your Titanic.” -- Chloe Sullivan to Clark Kent

True Friendship is for all eternity. -- Blog Author

A simple friend mentions nice things about you. A good friend recalls you with fondness. A best friend has a scrapbook of you. But, a Friend says you are the eternal sunshine of her spotless soul. -- Blog Author

A Friend gives you an affectionate kiss for no apparent reason at all. -- Blog Author

A Friend can tell you things you don't want to tell yourself. -- Frances Ward Weller

Being deeply loved by your Friend gives you strength, while loving your Friend deeply gives you courage. -- Lao Tzu

A simple friend has never seen you cry. A good friend has seen a tear (or two) form at the corner of your eye. A best friend has shoulders soggy from your tears. But, a Friend has seen you go through an earth shattering emotional catharsis. -- Blog Author

"However rare true love may be, it is less so than true Friendship."
-- La Rochefoucauld (1665)

Miscellaneous Character: "Do you have a significant other?"
Fox Mulder: (thinking of his unique Friend Dana Scully) "Not in the widely accepted definition of that term." -- The X-Files

A single rose can be my garden... a single Friend, my world. -- Leo Buscaglia

A simple friend hates it when you call after she has gone to bed. A good friend asks you why you took so long to call. A best friend is happy to talk to you on the phone until 3am. But, a Friend insists that you come over instead, wants to know your deep troubles, and cuddle/sleep with you in her bed the whole night. -- Blog Author

Love is blind; Friendship just closes its eyes. -- Unknown

“Will you be my Friend of friends? Forever and ever?” -- The Bostonians (1984 DVD)

To lose a Friend is hardship, but to forget her is as if you died too. -- Blog Author

Your Friend will know you better in the first year you meet than your old friends will know you in a thousand years. -- Blog Author

A Friend is someone with whom you dare to be emotionally, spiritually, and psychologically naked with. -- Blog Author

"Stay" is a charming word in a Friend's vocabulary. -- Louisa May Alcott

“I shall love her all my life, shall be to her a faithful Friend. You call this folly; to me it is a hard duty, and the more I love her, the worthier of her will I endeavor to become by my own integrity of soul.” -- Louisa May Alcott

When you have a Friendship like that, it can feel so mystical... so otherworldly... -- Blog Author

What is a Friend? A soul dwelling in two bodies. -- Aristotle

A Friend knows your deepest & innermost desires. -- Blog Author

You like and care about your simple friends. You cherish your good friends. You love your best friends with all your heart. But, you love your Friend with every fiber of your being. -- Blog Author

"Every man passes his life in the search after Friendship." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

The only unsinkable ship is Friendship. -- Jeff Sczpanski

True Friendship is like sound health; the value of it is seldom known until it be lost. -- Charles Caleb Colton (1825)

The way I see it, saying romantic friendship is like 'a subcategory' to homosexuality or at least 'the stepchild' of lesbianism is the general equivalent of saying Belle's intense romantic love for the Beast is like 'a subcategory' to bestiality or at least 'the stepchild' of zoophilia erotica. Yes, it is that absurd. Because their love was truly a living force of its own; deserving a unique and special category all by itself. It is no wonder then, their passionate love was best described as a tale as old as time, a tune as old as song, a song as old as rhyme, and as certain as the sun rising in the east! -- Blog Author

Life without a Friend is like death without a witness. -- Spanish Proverb

"Friendship is Love without his wings!" -- Lord Byron (1806)

National Friendship Day is on the first Sunday in August. International Friendship Month is February. Old Friends, New Friends Week is the third week of May. I, myself, declare Romantic Friendship Day to be on November 19. -- Blog Author

St. Jonathan is the Patron Saint of Friendship. I, Lillian Marie, am the self-proclaimed Patron Saint of Romantic Friendship. -- Blog Author

A true Friend loves you, not for what you are, but for what she is when she’s with you. -- Roy Croft

You come to love not by finding the perfect Friend, but by seeing an imperfect Friend perfectly. -- Sam Keen

A Friend is the life of the soul. It is the harmony of the universe. -- William Ellery Channing

We call a person who has lost her mother, an orphan; and a widow a woman who has lost her husband. But, a woman who has known the immense unhappiness of losing a Friend, by what name do we call her? Here, every language is silent, and holds its peace in impotence. -- ALarson 1.25.02

Comments/Feedbacks Page

2011-05-28T01:42:00.001-07:00

WONDERFUL! Somebody who understands what I'm only just learning. My friend and I have felt confused and guilty, even though we know we're never going to go against our Christian principals. I have sooo many questions - just can't think of how to put it all into words. But, I looooove your whole journal! THANK YOU! ~~Samantha~~

Hi Lillian,
I found your blog about a year ago. I read most of it then. I just found it again today. Your format is nicer, but the blog still touches my soul the same. I like the pictures you have included. Makes me wish it was the norm. I wish I was as brave as you. Take care! ~~Jessica~~

Hi there. Nice blog! I like your journal; it's looking so cool according to blog theme. You have shared useful information. I'd like to join your website again and again. I want to say thanks to this blog owner. Keep up the good work! It really gives good details. Bharat also loves it. ~~Arya Samaj Mandir in Noida~~

[Response] You're very welcome indeed! In fact, why don't you become my 11th follower? Add yourself to my blogroll. Uh, er... Where exactly are you from?? My best guess: Its close to Delhi, the capital of India.

Greetings from Vicky & Rachel in Newfoundland,

I wouldn't quite say I stumbled upon your blog, as I was looking for this content specifically. However, I wasn't quite expecting to find something like this-- so personal. I'd like you to know that I, myself, have a romantic friend. I wasn't looking for her, as you are looking, but we happened by chance. So what you're looking for exists. It's very real. So genuine that it at times seems in fact surreal. :]

Ms. Lillian Marie, you have a very beautiful (quite rare) love that you're looking for, although not easy to maintain. I hope you find her.

[Response] Thank you so very much..... And yes, all this content is very, very personal. I hope I find her too..... **Smiles Softly**

Hello dear, I'm Sue from Nebraska; just a traditional heterosexual housewife with 2 kids. You are so incredibly talented, and when I can't find a new entry of yours, (and I check often, like if you were my friend next door), I feel a loss.....

[Response] I really liked the personal e-mail you wrote to me. It was the very best comment/feedback I ever got. In fact, you're located in an entry titled, "A Hundred Years From Now..." I hope you don't mind. FYI, yours was also the very first (the earliest) letter I ever got. I also appreciated our several subsequent e-mail correspondences. Trust me, your blog is NOT BORING at all! It is very nice. However; as you mentioning that I should get the whole thing 'officially' published, I'm very sorry. I just can't. My personal reasons for this are complex. You know, sometimes I wonder (even up to this day), if you are actually someone I personally know in real-life. But, I suppose I'll never know...

An insightful post. Will definitely help because I also host workshops in my local community [The Psychology With Which Women Regard Other Women]

Thanks,
Karim - Creating Power
September 22, 2009 5:39 AM

[Response] You're welcome. If you liked that particular entry, I strongly reconmmend you read also, "Proposing A Third Way Of Life."

It's sad that the world is so perverted, that this kind of affection is associated with sexuality. For years I thought I was a pervert for wanting to be this close to another girl, but now I think this is what God originally intended friendship to be like.

Written By Gabrielle
November 3, 2011 11:00 AM

[Response] Correction: I know this is what God originally intended Friendship to be like.

Capitalize it. Spread the Word!!!

What's your REAL name? Just who the heck are you?! (from an annoymous individual)

[Response] Well, let's just say my pen-name 'nearly resembles' my true name, LOL!

I found your blog when I was searching for something that I could relate to. When I was searching on the Internet, most of them turned out to be lesbian, and that's not what I'm looking for. I searched on Amazon.com for things and then it started to suggest gay and lesbian readings to me... I got a little offended that Amazon.com was judging me. :) Your blog really spoke to me because I really think I understand where you are coming from. ~~Danielle, a shy and easily embarrassed librarian from Colorado~~

[Response] Yes; I try my best to get my message across clearly. Still, there are some people (out there) who think I'm just crazy. Anyway, its good to know that you got the 'main idea' of my entire website.

Hi, I'm Martha. Interesting... This is the first I'd heard of that sort of ceremony. But my parents have no clue about me! I know my dad will not get it or accept it at all; I wouldn't ever have an official Friendship Commitment Ceremony, that's for sure :-(

[Response] To tell you the truth, my parents also have no clue about who I am. So, I can relate very much to your inner (and very real) pain. I might never have a Friendship Commitment Ceremony too (because of rejection and scorn). In a way, society has become so very 'backwards' in this day and age. NOW it is okay to have homosexual/gay weddings, but I cannot marry my best Friend? What has this world come to?? **Sighs**

My name's Cindy. Geez, you've hit the nail on the head for me. I see you wrote these entries some time ago, but it's very relevant for me today. Although "happily" married, I've bonded very closely to a friend. Her husband can't get his head around it, and is worried that we're going to run off together (we're not planning on it!). His attitude has caused us a little confusion and even some perplexity, even though everything feels so right between us. Although I've told my husband, we dare not tell hers that we hold hands and hug for longer than what most people do. Yet, we have nothing to hide. We have no sexual interest in each other at all, and "love" our husbands....

[Response] Yeah, but which entries are you referring to??? LOL, I mean I've got like a total of 105 entries altogether (which is a lot!)

Cindy: Oh no, I just meant the whole "romantic friendship" concept/idea. It is really good.

Hello, my name is Esther. I love the trust and loyalty they share as best friends which, in many cases, do not exist in this world anymore. I'm reffering to the Oprah & Gayle, and Siegfried & Roy entries.

[Response] Actually, I am implying they're more than best friends, but not lovers. And that (same thing) goes for the rest of other platonic romantic pairs. It is like Close Friendship Encounters of the Fourth Kind or like Special Relationships in the Twilight Zone. But yes, they're Friends; not lovers. Hard to explain!

You can call me Isabella. I can completely identify with the type of relationship they have (Oprah & Gayle) People pick it apart... and THAT is why I struggle so much with my own feelings here in Salt Lake City. It is amazing I can kiss a guy on the first date, kiss my dog, my cat, and my new computer. But, if I get that close to a Friend that I have known for almost 20 years in Utah, red flags go up with people.

[Response] Yes, I know! Very sad....

You should see the 3rd movie! It's a gay allegory, considering gay adoption by Timon and Pumbaa! Great. ~~Zack, an aimless twenty-something party guy from Molokai, Hawaii~~

[Response] I saw it, and I'm alluding to "something else" actually.... hence the title of my blog & book. But, thanks for reading my entries! I agree with you. It was a great movie.

Correction: "The Lion King 1-1/2" is also being listed as "The Lion King III: Hakuna Matata" in other countries/regions.

Bottom Line: These two movies are the same.

Question: Will there be a 4th movie? I hope so!

What's wrong with interpreting them as gay or interpreting them as a friendship? Timon canonically also falls "in love" with a female meerkat in one story so I see him more as ambiguously bisexual.

Why even debate it though? As an active fandom shipper I have het couples, femme slash couples, and male slash couples. I rarely ship what is "canon", at least, canonically stated as a couple. Especially for het. I think for myself. :)

[Response]Currently pending....

Good material on romantic friendships is not easy to find, as you well know. I am so happy to have found this blog!

I do agree with what Dylan said about homosexuality existing alongside romantic friendship - I also like to think that if I had a friend for whom I started to have sexual feelings, that wouldn't *necessarily* make it any less pure and wonderful.

[Response] Oh, really? **Raises Eyebrows** Interesting.... Please do continue (carry on) with whatever else you wish to say. Is there any additional comments you'd like to publish on here? Or other tidbits of information you'd like to share with the rest of us? **Smile**

Yes, thank you! But by and large, I wholeheartedly agree with what you say and it's so relieving to find someone who feels the way I do. I am not a highly sexual person and intimate friendship has always been more important to me than sexual relationships (which I have never even had...) I once had a friend who came close to being a Friend, so I know how wonderful it can be. There's something so clean and deep and liberating in not being a part of what the mainstream considers "romance", which I think is largely "patriarchy made vaguely appealing to women."

~~Jane~~

[Response] Frankly, to tell you the truth, my journal IS THE ONLY Romantic Friendship blog out there! I guess that makes it official. I'm not joking sweetie. Look it up on the Google search engine. It not only appears on the very first page, but also on the very top 1st hyperlink as well (chuckles). So yes Jane, material like this is very hard to come by. Yet, it is extremely, extremely easy to find. If and ONLY IF people know exactly what they're searching for. Actually, all they need to do is type down two critical keywords, "romantic friendship."

It seems we have a lot in common (including us being both virgins), LOL. But, could you be a little more specific on what you liked about my blog? What were your favorite entries?? What lines "jumped out" at you? Did you read my journal from the beginning (dating back to the earliest archives) or did you only look at the entries that "caught" your attention? I'd need to know this for statistical purposes. Thank you.

Did you like my commentaries on the FGT & XWP entries? I've spend a considerable amount of time on these. Or perhaps (like some readers have commented) did you like my "Dawn Of A New Era" romantic pics of women posing together intimately?

If you want, add yourself to my blogroll because I am creating about 15 more entries by the end of summer. It'd be nice if you became my 9th follower. **Smile** I appreciate your thoughtful comments!

P.S. Can you tell me more about your friend who almost became your Friend? I mean, just general stuff of course. Like where did you two meet? How did you get to know each other? Or just tell me some small story, funny anecdotes; etc which pretty much summarizes your friendship with this person. I'd be interested to read about it!

[Jane] By “hard to find,” I suppose I meant hard to find in quantity/in the mainstream... But thankfully not in quality, as your blog proves!

I have not had time yet to read all of the entries, as I am finishing up my final semester as an undergraduate at university (my last assignment is due tomorrow!) But so far, I have enjoyed the photo posts (both of women and of men, but especially the historic male friendship postcards and photos) and the posts with essays, such as “Empty Seats” that explore the reasoning behind the lack of romantic friendship in society today. I am interested academically in the connections between homophobia, misogyny, and the decline of romantic friendship, and personally in finding out how other people feel about romantic friendship and meeting others who are searching for one. When reading a blog, I tend to start with entries that catch my attention, but usually eventually read all of them (like yours).

I don't mind talking about my friend (who almost became my Friend). I met her at an event that my high school hosted for incoming freshmen. We were put into groups to tour the campus, and she was randomly placed in the same one I was. I'm usually pretty shy about talking to random people, but she caught my eye because of her appearance – long, slightly wavy dark hair, pale skin, and green-blue eyes. She was also wearing a t-shirt with a picture of Legolas from The Lord of the Rings. I thought, “she’s either a crazy Legolas fangirl, or a really cool person.” So I took a risk and asked her if she was a Lord of the Rings fan. She said yes, and asked me if I'd read the books (as opposed to just having seen the movies.) I said yes and we went from there.

We found out that we had an enormous number of interests and opinions in common, and we became closer as time went on. Being around her made me so happy. We were somewhat physically close and sometimes linked arms while walking or cuddled or held each other more than what would be considered “normal,” but we never kissed or did more than that. (Though I would have loved to have kissed her.) Once I was over at her house and we just fell asleep on the sofa together without meaning to. When I woke up and realized what had happened, I thought it was the cutest thing ever. I sometimes got the impression that she would have liked to be closer (to be able to kiss, etc.) but I was too nervous to ask because I didn't want her to think I was a lesbian, so I never found out. We had a falling out in the middle of our senior year of high school. We eventually made up, but we have not seen each other much since then.

I identify today as an asexual bi-romantic. I am sometimes attracted to men in books and movies, and more rarely to women. But, she is the only person I have ever been romantically attached to in real life. It has been almost eight years since I met her and I still wish I could make things work out with her, although I now know that there are several reasons why she is not completely right for me. I characterize my attachment to her as a romantic friendship rather than sexual attraction because I never experienced a desire to have sex with her – just to kiss, cuddle, have romantic dinners, and all those other wonderful things.

~~Jane P.S. I'm from New England~~

[Response] Thanks so much for sharing your story Jane!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You are a woman of such wisdom.... I also picture you as a lone beautiful maiden standing on the crest of a small hill, the light breeze blowing your hair and simple frock as you look off into the distance with a gentle smile.... ~~Aaron Zimmerman~~

[Response] Er... Um, thanks. I never thought of myself in that way. How poetic!

What nice pictures! We really are missing a lot in our "modern" understanding of Friendship. ~~Seth J. Keegan~~

This is sadly true (what you wrote in teh blog description)....[sigh] Ever liked Duran Duran? well, it seems that the bass player and lead singer (John and Simon) actually have this kind of friendship... Humm... dunno what one thing has to do with the other anyhow... anyway, great blog!

Posted By Marian On Romantic Friendships Between Males I
August 1, 2011 10:57 AM

Ibson's book, "Picturing Men", is not just a picture book, but a serious and well-written scholarly essay analyzing the changes in American male relationships as portrayed in vernacular photography from roughly 1850 to 1950. I read the book from cover to cover and loved it. It is one of a small handful of books which has had the most profound affect on my life. Your observation about the devolution of affection among male athletes, which Ibson points out in his book, is well taken and exemplifies a much wider degeneration of connection between men in America over the course of a century or less." ~~Mike, an avid reader~~

It's too long to read (I mean, the historical examples). Can you try to break em' up into shorter sections? Thanks! ~~Barbara Whittaker~~

[Response] Allright, I'll try my best. Thanks for your helpful feedback!!

I can't believe I found you! Someone who can put into words this undefinable relationship. Someone who can help alleviate the confusion. But from what I can see, you've left plenty for me to read through. I never went searching for a romantic friendship (until now). We're not lesbians and never were, but it confused both of us (to the extent that I self-harmed due to the misplaced guilt). Although we'll probably never aspire to this kind of unique relationship (our families and friends wouldn't understand); still it is reassuring to find that others have walked this path.

I just love her - and she loves me, period. Loving her helps me understand how to love God more intimately. How holding His hand might also bring tears to my eyes because of the sheer beauty of a wonderful love. ~~Beatrice & Felicia~~

What's up? I'm Vanessa. You should check out Rizzoli & Isles, another romantic friendship in the making :) ~~An annoymous bored gal randomly browsing on the Internet~~

The music video is amazing. The lyrics and music match the scenes better than I could have imagined, and it shows such a beautiful romantic friendship between the two women. It nearly brings tears to my eyes and makes me long for something like what they have. I'll always remember Idgie & Ruth. ~~Valerie Swanson~~

I believe idgie has romantic feelings for ruth, which is her bestfriend and ruth can sense it, but back in those days you were to never show the truth if you were gay or even thought of being gay. there were still lesbians back then but they were unable to act on it.... yes it is a friendship, but it goes deeper then that for one while the other is iffy but im sure feels it too.

From Ariel, one of your regular followers on Blogger
Posted On July 30, 2011 7:30 AM

Hi, I'm from Spain. =) This summer I've seen Fried Green Tomatoes for the first time and I should to say that is the one of the best movies I've ever seen. I want to get the Extended Anniversary Edition but only it sells in USA =( Thanks to this movie my life is other, I think that Idgie is a fantastic person, I love Idgie, and Smokey, and Big George and all the chararcters, but in special Idgie, I think that Mary Stuart Masterson was the best actress to play her. All the time I am looking for things about this movie because I have a obsession with this story and I can say that this critic is wonderful. This Sunday done a month that I saw this magical movie and I have seen the movie more than 6 times and always I finished with tears on my eyes or when I heard de OST I have to quit it because I get sad and nostalgic. In conclusion this is a great movie, that never I will forget it in my whole life. Sorry for my English.
Originally Dated: September 5, 2011 3:21 PM

[Response]If you love this movie, you'll go crazy-rabid with the Xena Warrior Princess show. Think of it as a 2,000 to 3,000 years long romance epic saga between Idgie & Ruth, but X10 more intense. They (like them) never had sex nor made out, but it was a very romantic Tv show nevertheless. In fact, I've just devoted 17 cool entries to that specific show. About Xena & Gabrielle. Good luck!!! By the way, FGT is coming soon to blu-ray; even better! Save your money.
Posted On September 8, 2011 2:39 PM

As for romantic friendships, there are women out there who want them, though they do not always realize that this is what is missing in their lives. I found my soulmate in the Xenaverse. We were introduced by a mutual friend, a fellow Xena fanfic writer that I met because of my writing. Not everyone can understand a romantic friendship. But for some, it is very important and the lack thereof can leave an aching in their soul. I can tell you that they exist, but sadly, I can't tell you where to find them. I waited 34 years to find mine.
~~Chemmy~~

Really, I tell you... You shouldn't disregard the notion of becoming a writer, a published writer, where people can read, and enjoy, and become educated with your research, your wit and your intelligence. Not to mention, your candor and your courage. ~~Nora Townsend~~

Surely you have found a good publisher.... the whole work (in general) is brilliant, far too wonderful for a little AOL blog. Do consider it, it's been wonderful to read. So hard to comment on each and every one, as it takes me time to digest your words. But, if I had volumes and volumes to read, I would still anticipate more. Thank you. ~~Tracy Shepherd~~

I get an emotional rise out of watching two women get emotionally close! ~~Julia Greenberg~~

Hello there, I'm Paula. Lol, I should read down further before I comment on "Affectional Orientation..." You and I, uh, share some things in common. I care intensely, love intensely, but it's not a crush. And I don't have the desire for the romantic exclusivity that tends to be associated with romanticism. Just because I have a "best friend" doesn't mean there aren't other women who I connect on a deep level with and share things with. I perceive a "romantic friendship" as being something of a special nature out of all other friendships that person has, and I can't see myself in such a relationship. No, I think I would find it constrictive. Yet I still wish I had someone I could spend my life with in the "share the house with" sense, to do chores with, share time when I feel like I need to be around other people--or not, if we have other plans--just have someone there. (I used to sleep at the foot of my roommate's bed in college sometimes, next to her--I didn't have as close a connection with her as with my best friend, but it was comforting and enjoyable. So I see even that sort of thing as separate from the romantic friendship mold because we weren't THAT close, just comfortable with each other.) However, could I truly desire a romantic friendship and not know it? I won't rule it out, but at this moment I guess it doesn't look that much like it to me.

[Response] Paula, it's okay! Not everybody has to agree with my ideas/concepts. In fact, some don't. But, thank you for taking your time to not only read my blog, but also for taking your time to post such a lengthy in-depth thoughtful comment! Also, thanks again for being very honest with yourself at the end.

Wow. . . I just discovered this today, after a friend on the phone told me I should look up what a traditional "Boston marriage" was. Because you see, I'm pretty sure I won't be marrying anyone (I don't really have a thing for guys--yet I'm still quite "straight"), and your post about alternatives to being single all one's life really was fascinating. I was lamenting to my friend how I didn't want to live by myself but couldn't imagine living with someone who would end up dating guys all the time, yet I have absolutely zero sexual attraction to other women (and my religious beliefs would prohibit me from acting on such attraction even if I did experience it). I just encountered the whole romantic friendship idea, and am now trying to see how that fits with the asexuality community labels and ideas?? Oh, and by the way, I'm Ronnie.

[Response] Well, it has very similar ideas, particularly in the "asexual lesbian" section of the general asexuality community board forum. However, I believe the term itself to be kinda of a misnomer. But, that's just my personal opinion. FYI, I'm also a member there. I can easily be found under XWPChick09. Still, I don't quite feel I belong there. Instead, I truly, truly feel 100% at home in the Xenaverse. It is my very own personal Heaven on earth. Anyway, **waves** its nice meeting you Ronnie! I hope you will eventually warm up to the idea of Romantic Friendship & Boston marriage. Its a whole "new" radical dimension out there to explore!

I'm Claudia here. I can completely understand why someone would want to choose that kind of arrangement. Love, support, commitment and the toilet seat would always be down. :) I totally loved the "So, Are You Two Together?" entries!

You know.... women are funny creatures. Very often the affection, close contact, the snuggling; well it is enough. We nest. ~~Hannah & Natasha~~

Go figure.... you sit down to your computer with only your thoughts, and you have so profoundly affected me. ~~Rebecca~~

I just checked out the blog! Very nice! Added it to my favorites! ~~Skygack, an asexual lesbian~~

Like a lost, tech savvy soul, I consulted google for similar [nonsexual] couple pairs that behave this way and found the rare [and ancient] coined term, “Romantic Friendship.” Ms. Lillian.... All I can say is this: Thank the Lord for your existence! Amen. ~~Connie, a prim schoolteacher from Auckland, New Zealand~~

Holy Cow! I know why you created an entire blog on this whole 'weird' subject..... You've finally managed 'to connect' all the dots. Yes, I'm serious! You have such an eccentric mind. ~~Laura, a humanitarian doc stationed in Somalia, Africa~~

Who are you who writes with such insight about Friendship and love, and with such similarity to my own heart and mind? ~~Sandy, a lonely but deep-thinker kind of girl living in the UK~~

G'Day! I've been reading your whole blog up to this point. Fair dinkum! I can relate to a lot of it. I too want a romantic friendship and a boston marriage. Its very inspiring :) ~~Amanda from Queensland, Australia ~~

Thank you so much for this Lillian. You're such a courageous and wise lady. I've been working my way through your blog (I'm Ange). In my case, my friend and I have been taken by surprise. It's still early, but we are no longer struggling, thanks to your website! We talk to each other and talk to God about this a lot. We don't feel condemned by God - in fact, I think He's blessed us with a special privilege. We're certainly not asexual, and we've just had to give up trying to define it all. I don't even know if the Boston thing is for us, but we just love each other. We hold hands (discreetly), we give each other many pecks on the cheek (discreetly), and we hug for much longer than "normal". Yet at the same time, we have no erotic thoughts about each other at all. We didn't know what to call ourselves, but now I think we do. We're romantic friends!

Hi everyone!

Guy Love is a great thing. In our age, we tend to be afraid of attraction, affection, and deep connection between guy friends. I'm not gay, but I think deep friendships are important. Emotional bonding doesn't necessarily have to be sexual. And I think it is healthy to have relational intimacy with our friends. It takes work, and trust, and time, and forgiveness--but it is such a healthy thing.

I lost my best friend because of strong cultural mores and homophobia. And we weren’t even gay; our relationship was platonic. We were just two kids who connected at a soul-deep level, but our friendship was so misunderstood that the adults around us essentially forced us apart.

It was a sad situation, but out of it I have decided to write a novel–an imaginative retelling of the biblical story of Jonathan and David–in honor of the goodness of deep friendships between men. I’d love for some input at http://www.benjamindavids.com

Written By Benjamin Davids
October 15, 2010 11:43 AM

I wanted to tell you already how much I appreciate what you have put together. I am a man who yearns for a romantic friendship with another man, or "Guy Love" as JD and Turk so eloquently put it (I recorded that episode a couple years ago when it first aired and it's still on my DVR), and although your blog is admittedly mostly about "Gal Love" I am finding it refreshing and inspiring. ~~Hank~~

I enjoyed coming across your blog and reading through it. I find almost 100% of what you say to be very affirming. I think people shouldn't have to worry about how they express affection towards their friends in private or in public.

I do take issue to one thing that you have said though. 'I have a dream that perhaps homosexuality will be a thing of the past...' I feel that homosexuality, heterosexuality and Boston marriage/romantic friendships can all co-inside. Friendship is different than sexuality, wouldn't you agree with that? ~~Dylan~~

[Response] You do mean, "can all co-exist." And yes, of course I know Friendship is different from sexuality. Don't fret or worry over that particular line too much. After all, I just merely said [note the keyword] "perhaps." Not even I am sure. I could be right or I could be wrong. However, one has certain opinions **clears throat**

Thanks for reading through it anyway! I'm glad you enjoyed it. I also appreciate any constructive criticism people may make towards my blog.

Howdy! I'm Charlie from Dallas, USA. And its awesome meeting you. I cannot tell you how encouraging it is to find another living person who holds a view so similar to my own, and trumpets that view with such passion. Bravo!

You dream beautifully, Lillian. Thank you for sharing your dream with the world, and know that at least one man out here shares your dream. May it be fulfilled soon. ~~Matthrew, a straight businessman from Singapore~~

Q & A Section With Blog Author

2011-05-28T01:41:00.001-07:00

TBA

I Have A Dream

2011-05-28T01:40:00.001-07:00

Dear Readers,

I have a dream that our future world will no longer be homophobic nor too sexualized, and that 'lost world' as it existed in the past will return to us with a revealing intensity, transforming our society into a much richer, colorful and more vibrant place (smiles softly). I have a dream the entire human race will finally realize that romantic love need not be accompanied by erotic love. I have a dream that women and men (in their own separate worlds) will realize it is very possible to have a long-term (or eternal) intimate romantic monogamous, but nonsexual relationship with one another exclusively.

I have a dream there will no longer be aloof, superficial, shallow or one-dimensional friendships. I have a dream Facebook, MySpace and Twitter will be a thing of the past as friends converse with each other once again face-to-face in the real world. I have a dream that deep intimate friends will allow themselves to literally faint if they saw something bad happened to their close cherished friends. I have a dream perhaps all of us, no matter what our views on "homoerotic" passages may be, can read the description of Socrates and Diotima and sigh, "Oh, what a beautiful portrait of friendship!"

I have a dream that straight men will start to have professional portraits of each other taken again in studios (as a sign of their deep intimate friendship and/or romantic friend). I have a dream that straight women will no longer 'be brainwashed' and know they can put another straight woman first in their lives (i.e. a Friend can be your significant other and soulmate). I have a dream that straight men will go to the movies together on a Saturday night (leaving no empty seats), cuddle, laugh and have a plain good ol' time! I have a dream that straight women will realize they can enjoy deep nonsexual physical and emotional intimacy with a nonsexual female life partner. I have a dream that all straight adolescent boys can playfully and affectionately lie on top of each other, smiling and laughing (no longer being ridden with anxiety) in group sport photographs, at the park playground or anywhere else. I have a dream that straight women can openly express their passionate love for each other, slow dance, kiss on the lips and send pretty nice flowers, without fear of 'looking lesbian'. I have a dream that straight men can hold hands, weep together uncontrollably, passionately sing of their guy love and openly declare their soulmate bond, without fear of ‘looking gay’. I have a dream that men and women can write thoughtful poems and terms of endearment letters expressing their affection and genuine fondness for the same-gender, without fear of 'looking odd'.

I have a dream that there are romantic, mushy and sentimental guys out there who are real-life Timons searching for their real-life Pumbaas (the one & only true classic revisitation of the extremely rare same-sex male Romantic Friendship).

I have a dream that there are romantic, mushy and sentimental gals out there who are real-life Xenas searching for their real-life Gabrielles (the one & only true classic revisitation of the extremely rare same-sex female Romantic Friendship).

I have a dream that there are romantic, mushy and sentimental men and women out there who are real-life Mulders searching for their real-life Scullys (the one & only true classic revisitation of the extremely rare opposite-sex Romantic Friendship).

I have a dream that Boston Marriages and Friendship Commitment Ceremonies would be as valid (and held to the same significance) as traditional marriages. I have a dream that rare terminologies, like Affectional Orientation, will achieve worldwide recognition by the year 2026. I have a dream there will be a plethora of modern Romantic Friendship same-sex couples in reality, in brand new novels and books, fresh theatrical plays and also musicals; even returning in movies and cinemas. I have a dream there will be same-gender figure skating partners in the Olympics, in romantic senior high school proms everywhere, and on reality shows such as 'Dancing With The Stars' too. Lastly, I have a dream that perhaps homosexuality will be a thing of the past, and that we all should adopt the prim, proper attitudes of the Victorian Era once again (and bring it back 21st century-style)!!!

Best Wishes,
Lillian Marie The Bostonian Lady

A Special Farewell

2011-05-28T01:39:00.001-07:00

Yes, it has finally come to an end. I hope you enjoyed reading it! More importantly, I hope you've gained new insights & perspectives, and that it will forever change the way you view friendships and/or relationships. It certainly looks like I will be "leaving", but that is just merely the title of my entry. I meant to give a farewell speech to my followers, yes, but I will come back (from time to time) to check on my blog to see if my soulmate "out there" has found me on here.

In retrospect (and an attempt to summarize the whole thing), I've told you about my new insight, admitted to having a girl crush, explored Hite's research in great depth, created a wonderful reading list on Friendships, had introduced Romantic Friendship (with passionate letters, historical & biblical examples), discussed an entire television show (plus a whole movie) based on it, and taught the concepts of Friendship Commitment Ceremonies & Boston Marriages.

In addition, I also mentioned the extraordinary love Oprah has for Gayle, the sweet and adorable love Timon has for Pumbaa, the magical and captivating love Siegfried has for Roy, the faithful and loyal love Bates has for Coman, the enduring and devoted love Idgie has for Ruth, and finally, the rare, eternal and powerful love Xena has for Gabrielle (across the untold millenniums) which reverberates throughout the cosmos....

Moreover, I talked about how my ultimate dilemma was resolved, what my deepest & innermost desire is, how I came to see the crystal clear truth, why a significant and mind-boggling paradigm shift had occurred within me, and finally, wrote a genuine note to men. I found interesting articles, managed to put up many fascinating & elusive (black and white) photos and slideshows of men together during an ancient era affectionately known as "the good ol' times." I then concluded this special chapter with a song titled, "Guy Love" which to me (deep down) felt reminiscent of "My Buddy" just less than a century ago.

Moving on....

The next seven entries will be filled with "memorable quotes" found throughout my journal/blog, listing "many quotes about Friendship", a "profound and moving letter" a reader sent me which touched the bottom of my heart, talking about my "sudden inspiration" on what I'll probably be doing for the rest of my life, and lastly, creating two slideshows on what I imagine to be the "dawn of a new era" if that lost world, deep intimate friendships, and romantic friendship would be revived in today's modern world (how it would look like).

Okay now, I want to give a special farewell to all of my readers. You know when Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. gave his famous "I Have A Dream" speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial during the 1963 March on Washington? I'll deliver my own in the very next entry.

A Xena Searching For Her Gabrielle

2011-05-28T01:36:00.000-07:00

I've thought long and hard about everything lately. In fact, whenever I attend to witness straight marriages (of relatives and friends I know) or see gay/lesbian weddings on television, I can truly see how elusive my dreams and desires are. I finally realized that I have a very "untraditional" vision when it comes to romance, commitment, intimacy and love (i.e. Boston marriage & romantic friendship). However, these concepts have been around since the birth of our species, and probably is as old as time!

I began to see that Disney classic fairytales (i.e. Snow White, The Little Mermaid, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty; etc) and the American Dream of having a husband, 2.5 kids and a white picket fence, while very popular desires, is not what I want deep down. Yes, although in a sense I'm “straight", that way of life (which is the norm) just isn't for me. It simply doesn't "fit" somehow. Don't get me wrong. I think the American Dream is really beautiful and sweet, but I have my own unique version of the Classic Fairytale. It is finding my soulmate, entering into a special & sacred Friendship Commitment Ceremony, and settling down into a Boston marriage that includes a passionate romantic friendship with my ladylove. No boyfriends or husbands in the picture, because she is "the one." In other words, my deepest and innermost desire is to spend the rest of my life with my Friend (yes, note the capital "F") with a true love that is strong, exclusive and steadfast, us growing old together, having 2.5 cats, and a blue picket fence with swirls of lavender; living happily realistically ever after. Yes, I'll always be a "Xena" searching for my "Gabrielle", and never give up hope that one day I will find her...

Then I realized something else. I'm now speaking directly to my future ladylove: If I do find you somewhere down the road, there may be a few bumps on our way back home. Why? Because society may not see our special bond in the same way as we do or even accept it. But, it doesn't matter because I love you, and together we will stand up for our beliefs and spread the truth. In fact, I want to give you a short poem (that I wrote) about some difficulties we my face:

"In the vast expanse of the universe,
I contemplate my existence and how I fit
Into a world where human touch has been corrupted.
If I gently take your hand in mine, fingers intertwined
Will they see two Friends who love and cherish each other?
Or will they see only physical contact,
And assume we are lovers?
When I tenderly kiss your cheek or lips,
Am I violating a law of God demeaned by social values,
Or am I simply expressing heartfelt affection?
I question the values set down by a society,
Where all touch has been deemed sexual.
How can I express my love for you,
When we cannot touch without disdainful looks?
You are my Friend and my soulmate,
My only desire is to express my love
Without fear of condemnation
In a world where love is misunderstood."

I recently bought a ring (Irish Friendship Love Claddagh Ring in Sterling Silver, #2601 found on Amazon.com). It reminds me of my favorite phrase, "Friendship is the happiest and most fully human of all loves; the crown of life and the school of virtue." I wear it on my finger all the time, and I have another one, just for you. It has two hands (representing human) holding a heart (that represents love) with a crown on top of it (which represents the crown of life). The ring is a symbol of love, loyalty, and Friendship. The hands are there for Friendship, the heart is there for love. For loyalty throughout the year, the crown is raised above. When it is worn on the right hand, with crown and heart facing out, the ring tells that the wearer's heart has yet to be won. While in a relationship it is worn with heart and crown facing inwards.

So when we do meet, become acquaintances, then friends, best friends, romantic friends and finally soulmates, I will kneel down and propose to you. If you say yes, I will say the exact words that comes with this special ring: "WITH THESE HANDS I GIVE YOU MY HEART AND I CROWN IT WITH MY LOVE." After that, I will turn my ring inwards, signifying that my heart has been won. It will definitely be the most memorable (and very unique) moment in our entire lives! I also bought a card at a store and saved it just for you:

To My Soulmate,

"I am so glad that you are part of my life. It is a privilege ~~ to know you, to share myself with you, and to walk together on the paths that take us in so many beautiful directions... I had heard of "soulmates" before, but I never knew such a person could exist ~~ until I met you... Somehow, out of all the twists and turns our lives could have taken, and out of all the chances we might have missed, it almost seems like we were given a meant-to-be moment ~~ to meet, to get to know one another, and to set the stage for a special togetherness... When I am with you, I know that I am in the presence of someone who makes my life more complete than I ever dreamed it could be. I turn to you for trust, and you give it openly. I look to you for inspiration, for answers, and for encouragement, and ~~ not only do you never let me down ~~ you lift my spirits up and take my thoughts to places where my troubles seem so much farther away and my joys feel like they're going to stay in my life forever... I hope you'll stay forever, too. I feel like you are my soulmate. And I want you to know that my world is reassured by you, my tomorrow's need to have you near, so many of my smiles depend on you, and my heart is so thankful that you are here..."

Love Always,
Lillian Marie The Bostonian Lady

Guy Love

2011-05-28T01:35:00.000-07:00

Here is something I found very endearing because I believe this to be a genuine attempt in restoring a world lost to homophobia. This video clip you're about to see is from the TV show "Scrubs". It's about two best Friends, J.D. & Turk, singing their romantic (yet nonsexual) guy love. The lyrics to the song is also included!

Note: If you cannot access this video, copy this address & paste it on your web browser toolbar above (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL4L4Uv5rf0&feature=related) and then click "Go."

[J.D.]
Let's face the facts about me and you,
A love unspecified.
Though I'm proud to call you "Chocolate Bear,"
The crowd will always talk and stare.

[Turk]
I feel exactly those feelings, too
And that's why I keep them inside.
'Cause this bear can't bear the world's disdain,
And sometimes it's easier to hide,
Than explain our

[J.D. and Turk]
Guy love,
That's all it is,
Guy love,
He's mine, I'm his,
There's nothing gay about it in our eyes.

[Turk]
You ask me 'bout this thing we share,

[J.D.]
And he tenderly replies,

[Turk]
It's guy love

[J.D. and Turk]
Between two guys.

[Turk]
We're closer than the average man and wife,

[J.D.]
That's why our matching bracelets say Turk and J.D.

[Turk]
You know I'll stick by for the rest of my life.

[J.D.]
You're the only man who's ever been inside of me.

[Turk]
Whoa, I just took out his appendix.

[J.D.]
There's no need to clarify,

[Turk]
Oh no?

[J.D.]
Just let it grow more and more each day.
It's like I married my best friend,

[Turk]
But in a totally manly way.

[J.D. and Turk]
Let's go!
It's guy love,
Don't compromise,
The feeeling of some other guy,
Holding up your heart,
Into the sky.

[J.D.]
I'll be there to care through all the lows.

[Turk]
I'll be there to share the highs.

[J.D. and Turk]
It's guy love,
Between two guys.

[J.D.]
And when I say, "I love you, Turk,"
It's not what it implies.

[J.D. and Turk]
It's guy love
Between
Two
Guys

The guys having a heart-to-heart pillow talk

"Hi everyone! Here is my chocolate bear."

One of their many lunch dates

An unbreakable bond

J.D. & Turk busy with their babies at a park

My Buddy

2011-05-28T01:34:00.000-07:00

Figure 130. Snapshot, trimmed, 2 3/4" X 4", two sailors, 1945. Verso: "Me and Joe Bartholemy [,] taken 1945 [,] Youngstown, Ohio."

The feelings (deep and profound romantic friendships) that American men might have had for each other during the Second World War had no widespread precedent for years, not since the culture had begun inducing such anxiety about same-sex genuine affection. Combat, actual or potential, gave to men's wartime relationships a peculiar intensity and tenderness that was no doubt as common in the war as it was rare in civilian life. No wonder that popular singer Kate Smith reported that one of the most requested songs during her many visits to troops overseas was "My Buddy", a sweet and mournful song to an absent love:

"Nights are long since you went away
I think about you all through the day
Miss your voice, the touch of your hand
I long to know that you'll understand
My buddy, my buddy
Your buddy misses you."

Exceptional (and very unique) in its own fashion, has there been anything in American popular music quite like "My Buddy" since the war? Any other mainstream song primarily imagined as being sung man-to-man --- other than son to father or vice versa --- that so directly expresses affection?

Lost World

2011-05-28T01:33:00.002-07:00

[This is the second part of John Ibson's American Sexuality Magazine]

While others have relied on traditional historians’ sources, letters and diary entries, to document nineteenth-century comfort with male intimacy (elaborate terms of endearment and unselfconscious physical closeness; for example), my own documentation of the lost world has been with everyday photographs of two or more American men together. With these photographs we can literally see the lost world as it existed, as it later began to disappear, and as it then reappeared with revealing intensity in a particular moment and setting, only to disappear yet again with stark finality.

After systematically reviewing many thousands of images, as well as more conventional sources, I write in Picturing Men that American males, together in pairs and larger groups, once had professional portraits of themselves taken with a revealing frequency, in dramatic contrast to the virtual lack of the practice today. The poses they once commonly struck were even more revealing than the fact that the portrait was taken. With notable nonchalance, they might hold hands, sit on a companion’s lap, share a chair, drape their arms around each other, or perform for the camera what I’ve termed a “pageant of masculinity,” perhaps dressing up as cowboys or striking a frivolous pose that often included a “token of manhood” such as a cigar, liquor bottle, or firearm. Official athletic team portraits were once especially common scenes of closeness among males, with teammates sometimes lying atop each other. When George Eastman’s introduction of roll film in 1888 made it easier for amateurs to take pictures, the earliest snapshots also often showed males, boys and men alike, posing very close together, obviously delighting in one another’s company.

With a distancing and stiffness of pose in team portraits, the first widespread signal of a change, males began slowly but quite surely to move apart in photographs as the twentieth century progressed. If there was to be any more hand-holding, lap-sitting, or chair-sharing, there would usually be an exaggerated facial expression or some other gesture, reassurance to the observer and the observed alike that this was all purely in fun, with no genuine intimacy involved. The contrast between earlier and later poses of men together in photographs is striking, charting an increasing discomfort with closeness to each other’s bodies. The practice of males having their studio portraits taken together, once such a common token of association, was by comparison virtually extinct by the 1930s.

The closeness of old, and even studio portraits of men together, survived, however, even thrived, in the military, particularly in wartime. So common were poses of obviously tender affection between servicemen during the Second World War, and so extensive was men’s participation in that war, that one can speak of no less than a widespread revival during those years of romantic friendships among men.

Some of the wartime photos displayed in Picturing Men may well be of those who discovered other men with same-sex yearnings during the War, a development analyzed well in Allan Berube’s 1990 book, Coming Out under Fire. But the everyday photos that I have studied, unless there is some explicit inscription on an image, cannot document a sexual relationship between the subjects. The presence or absence of intimacy is another matter, and is something to which an everyday photo can sometimes eloquently attest.

Revealingly enough, the ubiquitous intimacy of wartime was conspicuously absent among male civilians in photographs taken during the early postwar years. Even young boys, who, in contrast to older males, had shown more closeness in everyday photos before the War, posed in the 1950s with a formality and lack of closeness that mirrored the poses older males had been striking for decades. The fear of intimacy that would account for the empty theater seat had triumphed, commonly inhibiting the relationships of American males of all ages. Though Picturing Men ends with the 1950s, I believe that the distancing and fear of intimacy that was intensified and became so widespread during those years continues to vex American males in our own time.

The price paid for the fear of men’s intimacy is high –– for all males, not just those who yearn for each other sexually. William Pollack, Jr., in his Real Boys: Rescuing Our Sons from the Myths of Boyhood, and Dan Kindlon and Michael Thompson, in their Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys, have been foremost among those contemporary analysts looking at how lonely and emotionally inhibited the world of boys can be. They have shown how an intense fear of being thought gay can lead to various forms of overcompensation with cruel consequences.

For many American men, this overcompensation does not cease with the end of boyhood. Because men’s doings have been given more weight, deviations from the culture’s prescriptions for men are particularly troubling for many Americans, with displays of intimacy between men arousing much more scorn than similar displays among women. For example, with a tiresome, utterly predictable, yet highly revealing frequency, the lead actors in Brokeback Mountain were asked what in the world it was like -- implicitly how they could possibly have endured -- kissing another guy. You’d have thought that Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal had climbed Everest. Culturally speaking, for male leads in a major American film, apparently that’s just what they’d done.

It seems plausible, therefore, to propose that some of today’s opponents of same-sex marriage are more bothered by men marrying than by weddings for women. My argument for a gendered approach to sexual orientation does not imply that lesbians have it better. If this must be made a contest, it might be said that, as women, with their doings trivialized, lesbians actually have it worse. What I am suggesting is that some opposition to “gay marriage” is animated by tremendous discomfort with the love, tenderness, and intimacy between men that their marrying each other implies. Notions of men having furtive sex with multiple male partners with whom they are not in love or lastingly involved might be considerably less disagreeable.

Apparently thanks to the cynical design of Bush partisans, debates over same-sex marriage, usually focused on proposals to ban the practice, have in recent years aroused the Bush political base, sending the president’s supporters to the polls in numbers larger than might have been the case without a “gay marriage” controversy. However, the recent Democratic electoral successes suggest that many voters weren't as distracted by the sexual orientation of their fellow citizens as they had been in 2004. This allowed attention to be turned to more pressing concerns.

It might be well if sexual orientation were less of a distraction –– for us all –– in other aspects of American life beyond politics. We would be a considerably healthier society were we to see sexuality as a matter of much more nuance than a simple gay-straight dichotomy implies. And American men, whoever their sexual partners, would surely have a better time of it if they were able to restore some of that world lost to homophobia. At its heart, history teaches us that little in life is inevitable or immutable, that things surely don’t have to stay the way they currently are. In looking at the quite different way that things once were, Picturing Men reinforces that lesson.

Romantic Friendships Between Males II

2011-05-28T01:33:00.001-07:00

American Men Together In Snapshots

Figure 2. Daguerreotype, cased, 1/6 plate, two men, ca. 1853.

Figure 4. Carte de visite, two men, ca. 1865. Photographer: L. W. Clark, Streator, Illinois.

Figure 7. Cabinet card, two men, one on the other's lap, ca. 1870.

Figure 8. Cabinet card, two young men, one on the other's knee, ca. 1880.

Figure 13. Cabinet card, two men, 1888. Photographer: Winsor, Galesburg, Illinois.

Figure 22. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men with arms around each other, ca. 1915.

Figure 24. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men, "Two of a Kind," ca. 1920.

Figure 28. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men holding hands, ca. 1915.

Figure 30. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men with the man in the moon, Spokane, ca. 1915.

Figure 42. Cabinet card, two men, one with cigar, with arms around each other, ca. 1890. Photographer: Zuver, Grand Valley, Pennsylvania.

Figure 107. Snapshot, 2 1/2" X 3 5/8", two men kissing, ca. 1920.

Figure 45. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men with cigars, ca. 1915.

Figure 93. Snapshot, 2 1/2" X 4 1/4", on board, 4 1/8" X 5 5/8", two men. Verso: "Camping along the Conestoga. Summer 1919."

Figure 105. Real photo postcard, two young men reclining together by a tree stump, ca. 1925.

Figure 131. Snapshot, trimmed, 3" X 4 5/8", two sailors, ca. 1943.

Romantic Friendships Between Males I

2011-05-28T01:32:00.001-07:00

The Lost Ritual

Figure 64. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two sailors sharing a chair, 1918. Verso: "April 1918"

Figure 29. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men holding hands, ca. 1910. Verso: "I don't know if I sent you one like this or not, but it wont hurt to send you another if I did. Myself and Kent."

Figure 27. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men sharing a bench, ca. 1930.

Figure 26. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men holding hands, "a couple to draw from," 1908. Verso: Addressed to Mr. C. P. Simmons, Downs, Kansas, postmarked December 23, 1908, Goodman, Missouri. "12/12. Hello Charley. How are you enjoying your self now. Did you have a good time on your visit I will write you a letter after Xmas. and tell you all the news. Wishing you all a merry Xmas. and a Happy new year. As ever Oscar."

Figure 20. Studio portrait, 4"X6", two men, ca. 1930. Photographer: R. D. Jones.

Figure 106. Snapshot, 2 3/4" X 4 3/8", two men sitting on a guard rail, ca. 1925.

Figure 114. Snapshot, 2 3/4" X 4 1/2", two men on a blanket, ca. 1925.

Figure 117. Machine portrait, 1 1/2" X 2 1/8", two young men, ca. 1940.

Figure 121. Real photo postcard, snapshot, two young men in bed, ca. 1915.

Figure 125. Studio portrait, 2 1/4" X 3 5/8", two sailors, ca. 1943.

Figure 126. Studio portrait, 3 3/4" X 5 3/4", two sailors, ca. 1942.

Figure 127. Snapshot, 3 1/4" X 5 1/4", two sailors, "David + John 11/29/42."

Figure 25. Real photo postcard, studio portrait, two men holding hands with heads together, ca. 1915.

Whatever Happened To Genuine Intimacy?

2011-05-28T01:31:00.000-07:00

Merry Band Of Brothers

Whence Came The Void?

Picturing Men

2011-05-28T01:30:00.000-07:00

"There was a time in America when two men pictured with their arms wrapped around each other, or perhaps holding hands, weren't necessarily seen as sexually involved—a time when such gestures could be seen simply as those of intimate friendship rather than homoeroticism." [John Ibson]

Yes, I can say (in other words), men clearly were comfortable with each other, feeling free to openly express an unashamed and unselfconscious love, like deep fondness for all to witness—not hidden away on a "Brokeback Mountain", but in front of a camera, wholly without the coldness or the reassuringly exaggerated gestures that would come to mark photographs from a later time. I could see that the two photos shown below radiate playfulness, humor, warmth, physical intimacy, and calm affection. I found his interesting photos online and wanted to copy & paste it on here.

(Following is a progression of team sport photographs documenting a loss of physical closeness)

As you can see, team sport photographs went from men lying on top of each other (in a sweet and playful manner) to sitting down in chairs with their arms crossed or standing up with their hands behind their backs. Indeed, you should take a moment to compare and contrast the first photo with the last one.

Empty Seats

2011-05-28T01:28:00.000-07:00

Don't Look Gay: Why American Men Are Afraid of Intimacy with Each Other By John Ibson, American Sexuality Magazine. Posted July 4, 2007.

"Why do adolescent boys often leave empty seats between each other when they go to the movies? It's a product of the culture of male homophobia in America which pushes men to avoid intimacy and gay stereotypes."

On Saturday afternoon at the Cineplex you can see them: adolescent boys, there to watch one of the action films that Hollywood makes with an audience of young males in mind. What’s distinctive is where the boys sit in the theater. Though they might’ve come to the movie together and might even be close friends, they’ll leave an empty seat between them.

Just where the empty physical, as well as emotional, space between men comes from has been the essential subject of my research as a scholar of American culture. My work has culminated in a recent book, Picturing Men: A Century Male Relationships in Everyday American Photography.

What accounts for that space? A short answer, something academics like me are notoriously reticent to provide, is that countless American boys and the men that they become are afraid of intimacy with each other, fearful of how intimacy might be construed -- of what others and maybe even they themselves might decide that the closeness suggests. What I’m alluding to, of course, is homophobia.

I have examined the shifting history of intimacy among American males, charting the role that homophobia has played in the shifts that men’s intimacy has experienced over the last century and a half. What are the implications that my historical work might have for two matters prominent in contemporary public debate: first, the so-called “boy problem” in the United States, and secondly, whether persons of the same sex should be permitted to marry?

At Cal State Fullerton, I teach courses called The American Male and Sexual Orientations in American Culture. In some ways these classes occasionally overlap, as my students and I discuss the differences and the similarities between men who consider themselves gay or bisexual and those who think of themselves as straight. Though of course widely accepted today in the United States, the idea that one’s own identity is grounded in the sex of those whom one desires sexually, that the sex of the object of yearning identifies the yearner, rather than simply defining his desires, is a comparatively recent cultural notion.

But it isn’t a universal way of thinking about human sexuality. Scholars too rarely ask if what we know as “sexual orientation” is a fundamental distinction between human beings, or instead is less significant, perhaps much less significant, than gender distinctions.

My students and I often consider whether various kinds of fuss over sexual orientation actually are indirect ways of addressing more basic issues of gender, the ways that a particular society defines the appropriate behavior of males and of females. We examine the ways that negative stereotypes of gay men, for example, not only stigmatize those males considered gay, but also coerce all men to stay within the boundaries of culturally prescribed “male behavior,” lest they be thought queer. It’s common in our culture for a gay male to be thought “unmanly,” but it’s not inevitable that this equation be in force, or even that sexuality be viewed as a simple question of one or the other, gay or straight, with bisexuality in the middle ground.

Such, however, has been our society’s obsession with sexual orientation -- and with “appropriate” manliness -- that an association with gayness came to include certain occupations, words, gestures, and items of apparel, as well as one male’s willingness to express intimacy with another. The greater the scorn heaped upon gay males, the more that all males have been discouraged from displaying behavior associated with gayness -- with anything resembling intimacy heading the list of taboos.

Reflecting the powerful significance of gender in our society is the fact that lesbianism functions quite differently in the culture than does male homosexuality. Though lesbians and gay men are subjected in common to certain forms of discrimination, lesbianism is both stigmatized in some segments of “straight” society and powerfully eroticized in some “straight” quarters as well, a largely unknown occurrence with male homosexuality.

One hardly need suggest that life is easy for lesbians to observe that gay men seem to trouble straight people more, to observe that gay men are more associated with “perversion” than lesbians have been. A tomboy, revealingly enough, is often thought appealing or amusing, qualities never attributed to sissies.

This situation, rather than suggesting that lesbians (often stereotyped as the ultimate tomboys) have it easier, probably attests instead to the fact that the doings of men are simply paid more attention in our society. With male behavior mattering more, those who deviate from the strictures of manhood, then, are singularly bothersome. For those who believe in traditional gender distinctions, females whose behavior is thought to mirror that of males would be considerably less annoying, disgusting, laughable, or even noteworthy than that of “effeminate” men. Whatever the reason, a dislike of lesbianism did not bring about severe restrictions on displays of intimacy among all women in any way analogous to how homophobia prompted distancing between all American men.

For many centuries, various societies in various ways have differentiated between same-sex and different-sex activity. But the word “gay” and, according to many historians, even the very notion of sexual orientation on which it’s based, are of comparatively recent vintage. “Heterosexual” and homosexual” were coined, initially in German, less than a century and a half ago, a simple fact that should give pause to those who speak as if everyone everywhere has always been subject to inborn biological imperatives directing their sexual attention.

Societies may vary in terms of how sexual activities between persons of the same sex are scorned, ignored, or endorsed, but about the existence of oriented sexuality -- even the existence, some suspect, of a gay gene -- there is rarely any doubt. Those who expect to discover a “gay gene” may be just as wrong-headed as those who believe that they have discovered a Biblical injunction against homosexuality.

My own belief, by contrast, is that sexual meanings do not travel well across time and space, that history suggests that “sexual orientation” may be more of a recent human contrivance than a timeless biological phenomenon. Yet one doesn’t have to solve or even directly address the nature versus nurture riddle to simply observe that belief in an oriented sexuality brought with it a fear of male intimacy.

In the late nineteenth century and the early years of the twentieth, as Americans increasingly came to believe that “homosexual” was both an adjective and a noun, and that the word referred to something highly undesirable, men became much more hesitant to express, and even perhaps to feel, intimacy toward one another. In what might aptly be called a lost world of American men, it once was different. Other scholars, notably E. Anthony Rotundo in his 1993 book American Manhood, have shown that intimacy between men was once so encouraged and so widespread in our society that we may accurately speak of “romantic friendships” between males of the nineteenth century.

Interlocking Fingers And Pressing Palms

2011-05-28T01:27:00.000-07:00

[Article written by Keely Stevenson]

The first time seeing this, you are shocked. Men holding hands, and other macho sightings in Southern India?? Eventually, you get used to it. In between, you go through various stages of reaction—puzzlement, wonder, curiosity, disgust and finally, grudging acceptance. The sight is a common enough one in these parts--- grown men and teenaged boys holding hands in public like lovers that cannot bear physical separation from each other. It is like men cannot stop pawing each other. The way they carry on is enough to unleash the latent homophobe in most of us (rolls eyes).

Yet, in many places throughout Asia, holding hands amongst men is considered a common demonstration of hetero friendship. While crossing chaotic streets or sauntering down the sidewalk chewing paan, Indian men show no shame in interlocking fingers and pressing palms.

One NRI even claims to have seen "macchans," the alpha males of college campuses, locking arms with the lieutenants of their pack in India, and "goondas" holding hands just before launching an assault on a local tea shop that refuses to serve their gang free chai.

In America, though, hand holding between male friends is strictly prohibited by heteronormative social mores. Locking feet in a bhangra circle, however, is completely acceptable and straight. Lifting weights together in sleeveless tees and making eye contact in the full body mirror at the gym while executing synchronized bicep curls is also allowed. But hand holding between close friends? No, that'd be totally 'gay'.

"Anyway", says one man, "I have a good pal, born and raised here in Bangalore, who told me it is positively NOT gay behaviour , and he said: When I was a kid - OK, not now - I always held hands with my guy-friends, we all did. He then told me: To be completely honest, when I was a boy growing up here in Bangalore, I had no idea of even the existence of homosexuality. It was completely unheard of in my social circle.”

That pretty much convinced me, because I consider this guy a very credible source of local/cultural information!

So, if you are an Indian male visiting family in India, do not be alarmed if upon first meeting you after several years of absence your cousin Anirrudah immediately grabs your hand and holds it next to his thigh for a long period of time. Also do not be alarmed if he is several years older than you, pushing 30, living with his parents and still single. This is the Indian custom of saying, "How have you been, brother?"

Anirrudah will continue to hold your hand as his parents give your family a tour of their flat and introduce you to the goats that roam freely through their back yard. If you jump in alarm at the sight of wild animals, even for a second, Anirrudah will clasp your hand tighter and laugh a toothy grin in your face. "Are you frightened?" he will ask. Never, under any circumstance, say yes. Just smile and breathe. It's not gay, just 'totally uncomfortable' (chuckles).

“This weekend during the procession”, says Keely Stevenson, “I noticed two men walking hand-in-hand. It is something I have seen occasionally here in Tanzania, and something I remember being intrigued by in India last year. Two men holding hands here is merely an expression of friendship- an intimacy and companionship they are not afraid to show in public. Where I am from (the United States), two heterosexual male friends would never dream of holding hands while walking down the street—too afraid that people would question their sexual orientation or perhaps think of them as weak and unmanly. However, I found this simple and naïve expression of friendship quite refreshing.”

The Greatest Scientist Of All Time

2010-08-02T16:59:00.000-07:00

TBA

The Romantic Friendship Reader

2010-08-02T16:58:00.003-07:00

"I love you, man": Overt expression of affection in male-male interaction. By Mark T. Morman, Kory Floyd

The sharing of affection has long been recognized as a fundamental human need. Schutz (1958, 1966) was one of the first theorists to recognize the legitimacy of affection needs within interpersonal relationships. According to Schutz, affection is inherent to relational situations involving love, emotional closeness, personal confidences, and intimacy. Following suit, Rotter, Chance, and Phares (1972) classified affection as one of six fundamental human needs. Similarly, Frank (1973) and Koch (1959) both emphasized the significance of affection within therapeutic interventions, while Bowlby (1953) and Harlow (1974) commented on the key role affection plays in developmental psychological processes.

Despite its importance, affectionate communication invites numerous risks, including the risk that the intended meaning behind affectionate expressions will be misinterpreted. Such risks may be magnified in the male-male relationship, where overt expressions of affection may be all but prohibited by normative expectancies. Of course, this was not always the case. In 19th century America, young men developed romantic friendships with each other that today would be mistaken for homosexual relationships. They wrote love letters to each other, slept in the same bed, held each other physically, and confided intimately in each other. Moreover, all these emotionally-charged romantic friendships were widely and universally accepted by both men and women (Rotundo, 1993). As he describes them, young men in the 1800s bared their dreams, desires, insecurities and day-to-day dilemmas to one another; just exactly like the best of girlfriends did in the distant past.

Unfortunately, in contemporary times, however, culturally ingrained aspects of the male gender role may inhibit men from expressing affection to each other even when they truly feel it (Floyd, 1997b). Rabinowitz (1991) doc. This is why I recommend reading this rare/elusive book titled, “The Romantic Friendship Reader: Love Stories Between Men In Victoria America.” It is currently out of print, and no longer produced by the manufacturer. So, your best bet is buying this book on Amazon.com (from various potential sellers) as I did.

In fact, I suspect many men today are ready to explore the possibilities that lie beyond the gay-straight division and rigid (as well as ridiculous) gender rules when it comes to same-sex affectionate expressions. In fact, I believe men are ready to discover once again (something long-forgotten in our modern society) a unique Friendship that rises above the two extremes; something unlike no other… that certainly goes beyond words, categories and labels. And I believe the best place to start is reading about these wonderful love stories between men in Victorian America!

The Song of Roland

2010-08-02T16:58:00.001-07:00

[Essay written by Heather Elizabeth Peterson continued...]

On the other side of the divide if we can only lift the Victorians’ blinders for a moment we see a very different world: a world where friendship is considered the occasion for deep emotions and exaggerated behavior. This other view is much older than the one the Victorians bequeathed upon us: it can be seen clearly in such works as The Song of Roland, where the hero faints when he sees that his friend is dead. It is a world where male friendship is not a footnote in a book about homosexuality. Rather it is a living force of its own, considered one of the highest forms of human emotion and behavior, and worthy of profound sentiments!! And we have taken such a world and said, "Look. Here’s evidence of homosexuality." Tsk, tsk, tsk.

The death of Roland at the Battle of Roncevaux, from an illuminated manuscript c. 1455-1460.

Of all the people who lived on the other side of that divide who might have understood us, the classical writers would have been most sympathetic. They, like us, tended to look for sex within every friendship. Indeed, they were the ones who first theorized that Achilles and Patroklos were lovers. Yet even so, look at the list of the essays and dialogues that classical writers produced on platonic friendship: Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (Books 8 and 9), Cicero’s On Friendship, Plato’s Lysis, Plutarch’s How to Tell a Flatterer from a Friend, Seneca’s On Benefits, as well as various discussions by the Neopythagoreans, the early Christians, and others.

Why are historical writings on friendship ignored by scholars, except as tools to study other subjects? Why are dozens of books and articles published each year on the history of homosexuality, but virtually none on the history of friendship? Why does Yahoo list nearly one hundred sites on gay history but no sites on the history of friendship?

I do not propose to answer the above questions; I do not know the answer. I do know that the co-opting of historical passages on friendship by scholars of homosexuality, without similar consideration of such passages by scholars of friendship, is offering us a distorted view of both the history of homosexuality and the history of friendship. Only by establishing strong scholarship on the history of male friendship can we reach the point where we can distinguish "homoeroticism" (strong emotions between males) from true homoeroticism (sexual love between males).

As someone who writes non-scholarly articles on the history of male homosexuality, I would dearly like to see that day come. As someone who is female, I would also like to see more scholarship done on the history of female friendship and the much-neglected history of male-female friendship. And when that day comes, perhaps all of us, no matter what our views on "homoerotic" passages may be, can read the description of Socrates and Diotima and sigh, "Oh, what a beautiful portrait of friendship."

This text, or a variation on it, was originally published at
duskpeterson.com. Copyright © 2002 Heather Elizabeth Peterson.
Some rights reserved. The text is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution Noncommercial License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0). You may
freely print, post, e-mail, share, or otherwise distribute the
text for noncommercial purposes, provided that you include
this paragraph. The author's policies on derivative works and
fan works are available online (duskpeterson.com/copyright.htm).

The Misguided Search For "Homoeroticism" II

2010-08-02T16:57:00.001-07:00

It is understandable, then, that modern scholars who are faced with this cover-up of the past would bend over backwards to prove that they are not bowdlerizers. They do not ignore sexual desire when it appears in history, even if it appears in a covert form.

And scholars have become more aware of how covert sexual desire can be. This is a second reason why the search for "homoeroticism" has occurred: many scholars have realized how often homosexuality appears in other guises throughout history, particularly during periods when same-gender attracted people are persecuted. Fear, sublimation, and simple circumspection are such strong factors in history that many scholars feel they must consider any reference to male friendship as a possible reference to male homosexual love.

I do not want to deny that any of the above is true. There is no doubt that past scholarship has overlooked historical references to homosexuality; there is no doubt that many such references are hidden under the guise of friendship. My impression, though, is that the primary reason for the search for "homoeroticism" is that our era does not take friendship seriously.

We can see this by examining the invented passage on incestuous references in Virgil. It may in fact be that Virgil’s description of Aeneas and Anchises is intended as a reference to incest. Indeed, given the frequency with which classical mythology refers to incest, I do not see how such an interpretation can be ruled out. But I think that most readers are likely to opt for the "non-incest" interpretation, by Occam’s Razor: because they believe the simplest explanation is the most likely one, and the simplest explanation is that Anchises and Aeneas have a non-incestuous father-son love for each other.

But such an interpretation requires us to believe that parents and children can have deep feelings for each other. We must believe that two people who have no sexual attraction to each other can demonstrate strong emotions and engage in striking behavior.

My contention is that, while the modern world continues to believe this of parents and children, many people no longer believe this is true of two unrelated men. We have ceased to believe that it is possible for a man to deeply love another man, unless that love is sexually based.

Many exceptions to this popular belief exist, of course; I will not bother to list them all. Platonic male friendships remain a staple of popular culture. Yet I believe that, increasingly, the platonic aspect of such friendships is being questioned. Careful observers have noted the number of gay jokes that have crept into these friendships, the number of disclaimers that are now required to assure observers that the friends have no sexual feelings toward each other. Despite the best efforts of male bonding clinics, popular culture still decrees that male friends who have just undergone highly traumatic events in their lives are allowed to do no more than thump each other a couple of times on the back, lest they be suspected of being gay.

It is kinda sad that it has to take one of the MOST TRAGIC moments in American history for two men to get very affectionate and genuinely loving towards each other. In the picture below, we see two guys being really close, one constantly rubbing the others' back and kissing him on the head for an extended period of time.

Because, to tell you the truth, this would've been a beautiful portrait of friendship regardless of whether it was 9/11 or just another ordinary day outside.

All of this is, I believe, a dual legacy of the Freudian revolution and the Victorian era. Freud’s part in sexualizing friendships is obvious enough, but it may not be as clear that the Victorian era is also to blame. For a variety of reasons, the Victorians put forward certain rigid standards for male behavior that had not previously existed. We, living on the other side of that great divide, take it for granted that males who touch each other for lengthy periods, who express feelings of strong love for each other, and who demonstrate that love through dramatic behavior must be sexually attracted to each other (rolls eyes). This just goes to show how well the Victorians did their work.

The Misguided Search For "Homoeroticism" I

2010-08-02T16:55:00.001-07:00

A Plea for Research on Friendship
by Heather Elizabeth Peterson

The other day I picked up a scholarly book on Greek and Roman homosexuality and found in it a passage that appears, in various forms, in hundreds of books that are being published these days on the history of homosexuality. The passage was as follows:

In a recent study of this topic, some passages from Homer have been highlighted which would make it very difficult to think of the relationship between the two heroes as a simple friendship between comrades in arms. When his friend is dead, as I have already pointed out, Achilles no longer has any reason for living: over and over he wishes that he had never been born, declares that his only desire now is to die, and seems to threaten suicide. And he does not confine himself to expressing his sorrow by groaning and covering his head with clay, as is normal for Homeric heroes. At the beginning of the nineteenth book, Thetis finds him ‘stretched out on top of Patroclus’, desperately embracing his corpse, in an attitude which is not at all in keeping with most displays of mourning in Homer. So it is not difficult to read the story of a love affair behind Homer’s words. [Eva Cantarella: Bisexuality in the Ancient World]

I had to put down the book then, because a new book had arrived, on Greek and Roman incest. There I found myself perusing a passage that read as follows:

In a recent study of this topic, some passages from Virgil have been highlighted which would make it very difficult to think of the relationship between the two heroes as a simple father-son relationship. When Anchises declares he will allow the invaders of Troy to kill him, as I have already pointed out, Aeneas no longer has any reason for living: over and over he sobs to his father, declares that his only desire now is to die, and seems to threaten suicide. And he does not confine himself to expressing his love by weeping, as is normal for Virgilian heroes. At the end of the second book, Aeneas actually carries Anchises on his shoulders from the burning city, an action that results in the death of Aeneas’ wife. In no other case do we see such a display of love in Virgil. So it is not difficult to read the story of a love affair behind Virgil’s words.

In this post-Freudian world, I very much fear that the second passage (which is, of course, my own creation) will seem quite sensible to some of my readers. I suspect, though, that most readers, upon encountering such a passage, will say, "Wait a minute. All of these activities you mention weeping, threatening to kill oneself, taking on extraordinary action are the type of behavior that might be undertaken by a son grieving for the imminent death of his beloved father. Why do you propose that there is necessarily something sexual in nature taking place?”

Alas, this is a question that is rarely asked in the field of scholarship on the history of homosexuality. It has become de rigueur to assume that any reference to love between males must be a reference to "homoeroticism" a word that in theory means "sexual love between males or between females," though in practice it is being used by many scholars to mean "strong emotions between males."

Why, then, the double standard? Why is it that, when scholars encounter a historical passage that describes strong feelings between a parent and child, they assume that the passage refers to platonic love, but when they encounter a historical passage that describes strong feelings between two unrelated males, they argue that the passage refers to sexual love? Why has the search for homoeroticism (sexual love between males) become a search for "homoeroticism" (strong emotions between males)?

Part of the reason, I think, can be attributed to bad scholarship of the past. As we all know, Victorian and Edwardian scholars made valiant efforts to explain away clear historical references to homosexuality. Their embarrassment about such references is aptly summarized by a passage in E.M. Forster’s novel Maurice, in which a university instructor tells a student who is translating Plato’s Symposium, "Omit: a reference to the unspeakable vice of the Greeks." Other Victorian scholars would show even less integrity than the tutor, translating the passages so that the classical authors appeared to be speaking about platonic friendship.

The Eternal Debate II

2010-08-02T16:54:00.001-07:00

This is a question historians continue to delve into, and no doubt the causes of the decline of romantic friendship were complex. But one important factor seems to have helped to kill the idea that romantic feelings can exist alongside platonic feelings: the rise of the belief in sexual orientation.

Until this time, Europeans had continued to hold to the belief popular in classical times, that any ordinary person might have homosexual feelings. Most medieval and Renaissance Christians would have regarded such feelings as sinful, but they would be no more inclined to regard these people as entirely different than they would regard a person who was tempted to hit a friend as being entirely different from the rest of humankind.

Beginning in the eighteenth century, though, a notion was popularized that people with homoerotic feelings were a "third sex," very different from the ordinary person. This idea varied in the impact that it had on Europeans; in some parts of Europe, such as the Mediterranean, traditionally romantic activities continued to be practiced by same-sex friends up until the present day.

English-speaking countries were inclined to embrace the new view, but even there it was slow to arise. At the end of the nineteenth century in the United States, the third-sex view still had not yet supplanted the older idea that homoerotic feelings are potential in everyone. As a result, few people in Victorian America worried as to whether romantic activities such as holding hands or professing love were signs that two men were sexually attracted to one another. To have done so would have seemed as ridiculous to them as worrying whether a mother was incestuously attracted to her son if she kissed him. Though concern about homosexual leanings was beginning to creep into society, most Victorian Americans held to the classical belief that friends are just as likely as lovers to engage in romantic activities.

At that juncture, though, the sexologists arrived.

The impact that turn-of-the-century sexologists had on people's views of friendship cannot be underestimated. While a number of homoerotically attracted men and women over the centuries had regarded themselves as immutable members of a separate sexual group, this idea had never fully captured the popular imagination. Nor had these men and women tried to argue that same-sex romantic love was a sure-fire signal of the presence of same-sex erotic feelings. The sexologists, on the other hand, laid forth a vision of the world in which passionate love for another person was necessarily a sign of a heterosexual or homosexual orientation that was difficult or impossible to change. Their vision was embraced by society.

Within a few years, the societal belief that romantic activities are a legitimate form of friendship was crushed under the sexologists' assertion that same-sex romantic activities are always a sign of homoeroticism, which most sexologists regarded as a mental disease. Male romantic friendships did not survive the blow; female romantic friendships, which had flourished in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries under strong societal support, went largely underground. In English-speaking countries, societally supported romantic friendships died a hard death.

"You boys stopped fighting? Pals now? That's good. I love a little macho male bonding – I think it's sweet, I do, even if it probably is latent homosexuality being re-channeled, but I'm all for re-channeling so who cares, right?"
—Annie Savoy in the movie Bull Durham (1988)

In the meantime, what were homoerotically attracted men doing during all these centuries? Well, they were tailgating on the bandwagon of support for romantic friendships.

It must have been apparent to such men, from the moment that homosexuality became taboo in Europe, that romantic friendship could provide a cover for their love. In some cases, it appears that the love affairs started on a romantic platonic level and then became erotic as time went on; in other cases, the participants' feelings were erotic from the start. In either case, men who were sexually attracted to one another gratefully accepted the fruits of societal support of romantic friendship. The earliest arguments in favor of gay love, such as Edward Carpenter's Ioläus: An Anthology of Friendship (1908), used code language to indicate that same-sex erotic love was a form of romantic friendship.

Turn-of-the-century gay writers seem to have been struggling to revive classical ideas of a continuum between friendship and sexuality. But they did so in an era when it was dangerous to make such arguments. Since late medieval times, people had become increasingly suspicious of the idea that male/female romantic activities could live alongside platonic feelings. As a result of this and the sexologists' belief that this was also impossible in the case of same-sex romantic activities, a new wall was built between friendship and sexuality. This time, romantic activities were finally declared to be on the sexual side of the wall.

Friendship, especially male friendship, became the preserve of a few harmless, restrained activities, such as clapping one another on the back. Strong demonstrations of love were only permitted between friends if an emergency arose, such as one of the friends being injured. Not surprisingly, friendship began to go into decline, eclipsed by romantic love, which was now identified with erotic love. If any two non-related people were strongly drawn to one another, they were assured by society that they must be "in love" – that is, they must be sexually attracted to one another.

Gay writers, seeking to find their ancestors in the barren terrain of post-classical history, often strongly encouraged this trend, as did pro-gay heterosexual writers. For example, Byrne R. S. Fone, in his Columbia Anthology of Gay Literature, says about the love poems between medieval monks: "It can certainly be argued that such intense seemingly eroticized language need imply neither actual sexual experience nor even any sublimation of desire. The conventions of literary expression in the High Middle Ages were well attuned to an exaggerated profession of feeling between friends as well as between lovers." These are the only two possibilities that Fone puts forward in interpreting the poems: that they arose from sexual desire or that they were a literary convention of "exaggerated" expression.

The writers of the poems would have argued that there was nothing exaggerated about their expression – rather, we live in an era that is abnormally cool in its professions of friendship. Likewise, the writers would have objected to the idea that, if their feelings toward one another were non-erotic, their only reason to use romantic language must be literary convention (just for the decoration). Why, they would ask, do you people of the future assume that friends cannot have romantic feelings toward one another?

Other writers on homoeroticism, primarily scholars of lesbian history, have put forward a more subtle argument. They do not deny that some romantic friendships in the past involved people who held platonic feelings for one another. Instead, they say that such relationships, if they occurred today, would be labelled gay or lesbian. Therefore, they assert, it is legitimate for us to call these relationships homoerotic.

This may seem to be a suitable compromise, recognizing that some societal institutions, such as marriage, change dramatically over time. But unless practiced carefully, such pronouncements can become a form of cultural imperialism.

The assumption often underlying such arguments is that our modern belief that romance is nothing more than a subcategory of sexuality should be imposed upon people in eras that did not hold this belief. Romantic friendship is renamed gay love or lesbianism because our modern notions of friendship do not allow for the possibility of friends embracing romantic activities.

But such renaming obscures the fact that many people in the past would have vehemently disagreed with our notions of legitimate activities of friendship. They would have strongly opposed the idea that same-sex romantic friendship must be regarded only as a subcategory of homosexuality, in the same way that some bisexuals object to bisexuality being regarded only as a subcategory of homosexuality. Like bisexuals, romantic friends throughout history have engaged in activities that have been practiced at both ends of a spectrum. To say that romance must be identified only with sexual love is to deny romance its historical power as a form of friendship.

Many writers of gay history have rightly asserted that we can learn much about the history of homoeroticism by studying same-sex attracted people who practiced romantic friendship. But to leave the statement there – to imply that romantic friendship is nothing other than the stepchild of homoeroticism – is to practice what C. S. Lewis referred to in A Preface to Paradise Lost as the doctrine of the Unchanging Human Heart.

According to this method the things which separate one age from another are superficial. Just as, if we stripped the armour off a medieval knight or the lace off a Caroline courtier, we should find beneath them an anatomy identical with our own, so, it is held, if we strip off from Virgil his Roman imperialism, from Sidney his code of honour, from Lucretius his Epicurian philosophy, and from all who have it their religion, we shall find the Unchanging Human Heart, and on this we are to concentrate. . . .

Fortunately there is a better way. Instead of stripping the knight of his armour you can try to put his armour on yourself; instead of seeing how the courtier would look without his lace, you can try to see how you would feel with his lace; that is, with his honour, his wit, his royalism, and his gallantries out of the Grand Cyrus. I had much rather know what I would feel like if I adopted the beliefs of Lucretius than how Lucretius would have felt if he had never entertained them.

The loss of romantic friendship as a concept in English-speaking countries was a loss to humanity, because it left us with rigid notions about the division between friendship and erotic love. The wall between friendship and erotic love will only be strengthened if we strip romantic friendship of its distinctive features and treat it simply as a subcategory of homoeroticism. Instead of adopting this method, writers of gay history would bring greater benefit to society if they recognized gay people's kinship with platonic romantic friends, granting those friends their own, legitimate space in which to challenge modern society's views on friendship.

This text, or a variation on it, was originally published at
duskpeterson.com. Copyright © 2004 Heather Elizabeth Peterson.
Some rights reserved. The text is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution Noncommercial License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0). You may
freely print, post, e-mail, share, or otherwise distribute the
text for noncommercial purposes, provided that you include
this paragraph. The author's policies on derivative works and
fan works are available online (duskpeterson.com/copyright.htm).

The Eternal Debate I

2009-10-03T10:12:00.001-07:00

Romantic Friendship: Not Just a Code Word for Gay
by Heather Elizabeth Peterson

"I did not then entreat to have her stay;
It was your pleasure and your own remorse.
I was too young that time to value her,
But now I know her. If she be a traitor,
Why, so am I. We still have slept together,
Rose at an instant, learned, played, eat together;
And wheresoe'er we went, like Juno's swans,
Still we went coupled and inseparable."
—Celia in William Shakespeare's As You Like It (1600)

A number of writers of homoerotic fiction have remarked to me that they write about romantic love because they believe it has been the most intimate form of love throughout history. The above passage from Shakespeare would seem to be proof of that statement.

Yet in fact the passage is evidence of a belief that was once widely held in English-speaking countries but has now been largely forgotten: that romantic love need not be accompanied by erotic love.

Passages about friends offering romantic statements and gestures toward one another abound in historical literature and documents. A look at historical literature will turn up plenty of tales in which two friends send each other love letters, kiss each other on the lips, and cuddle together. Other activities, such as sleeping together or professing undying love, are also common. Modern readers tend to assume that these "romantic friendships," as they are often called, must have their origins in sexual attraction.

Romantic friendships cause problems for historians as well. When friends in history act romantically toward one another, is hidden sexual activity taking place? Are the friends sexually attracted to one another but not acting on their desires? Or are they (in the contemptuous phrase of a world that has devalued friendship) "just friends"?

The most historically honest answer seems to be, "All three." We know that same-sex lovers have sometimes hidden their erotic activities under the guise of friendship. We also have evidence that some of the friends who acted romantically toward one another throughout history were sexually attracted but did not realize this.

This second statement is as far as most historians are prepared to go. The fact is that romantic friendship has mainly been studied by scholars of gay and lesbian history. Living in a world where romantic friendship is no longer a living tradition, and seeking the roots of gay and lesbian history, many of these scholars have assumed that people who have romantic feelings for each other must be sexually attracted toward one another, even if they do not act on that attraction.

Yet in recent years a handful of people who are in romantic friendships have come forward and flatly denied this to be the case. Certainly one can argue that the division between sexual and nonsexual desires is hard to pinpoint. But in practice, we recognize that some relationships involve so little sexual desire that it is proper to refer to these relationships as non-erotic. Some participants in romantic friendships claim that their relationships are non-erotic.

If we deny this assertion, we must face the fact that modern-day romantic friends have the weight of history on their side. Only in relatively recent times has it been assumed that romantic feelings can only exist where erotic feelings are present. The very term romantic friendship was coined at the point in history (the nineteenth century) when this assertion began to be made. Until then, everyone assumed that, while not all friendships were romantic, romance was compatible with friendship.

For many centuries, in fact, romantic same-sex friendships played a much larger role in society than romantic erotic love between men and women.

"I know of these romantic friendships of the English and the Germans. They are not Latin. I think they are very good if they do not go on too long."
—Cara in Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited (1944)

In classical times, the boundary between romantic friendship and erotic love was often blurred because nearly everyone, including people opposed to homosexuality, assumed that male/male sexual attraction was ubiquitous. Greek and Roman writers used the word "friend" interchangeably to describe men with same-sex feelings that were clearly erotic, men with same-sex feelings that were clearly platonic, and men who may or may not have held erotic same-sex feelings. Many classical writers saw personal relationships as being located somewhere on a continuum between sexual love and platonic love. Activities that we would now regard as romantic could fall on either end of the spectrum.

In the Middle Ages, Christians built a strong wall between erotic and platonic feelings, declaring that friendship was something entirely different from sexual attraction. One of the side benefits of this is that friendships between males and females flourished as they never had before, since it was somewhat easier now for men and women to declare their love for one another without being assumed to be lovers in the sexual sense.

The immediate question arose as to whether romantic activities, such as writing love letters, fell into the sphere of friendship or sexuality. Given how much distrust many medieval Christians had of sexuality and how highly they exalted spiritual friendships, it is perhaps not surprising that they declared such activities to be legitimate forms of friendship. Clerics wrote love letters to Jesus and to each other, apparently believing, in most cases, that their feelings were entirely platonic. As a result, the classical continuum between friendship and romance was preserved, although the continuum between romance and sexuality had been sharply broken.

By the time the late Middle Ages arrived, male romantic friendship, while still important, had begun to be eclipsed by male/female romantic love. Courtly love, as it was called, was something of a headache for church officials. Officially, the church view had been, since earliest Christian times, that friendships between men and women were legitimate forms of love. Courtly love, though, went beyond this, declaring that male/female erotic love that was not consummated could also play a legitimate role in society. Not surprisingly, some courtly lovers wanted to go further than this. The wall between romance and sexuality was breaking down in a manner that made church officials more suspicious of romantic feelings. Increasingly, the ideal of male/female friendship would come under attack, until such friendships went into decline as a societal institution until the late twentieth century.

In the midst of all this, the Renaissance arrived, and Europeans received new access to classical writings on friendship. Male romantic friendship, which had looked for a while as though it would not survive as a strong societal institution, unexpectedly rebounded. Even more surprisingly, female romantic friendships became popular also.

Romantic friendships did not yet have a special name, for Renaissance people, like medieval people, assumed that romantic activities could legitimately occur within friendships. This made it easy for writers such as Shakespeare to insert romantic friendships into their tales. Regardless as to what their own views on such matters might be, Renaissance authors could assume that their audiences believed that romantic feelings can exist where erotic love is not present.

Thus far in European history, romantic friendship had a relatively untroubled history. So what happened?

Note To Men

2009-10-03T10:05:00.001-07:00

While my journal/blog has been 99% about women, I suddenly realized I didn't want to leave the guys out (it wouldn't be fair)! Unfortunately it's true that patriarchal culture reinforces the stereotype that men, and particularly gay men, are hypersexual and hence incapable of forming a long-term platonic relationship resembling Boston marriage. Well, I believe it is possible (although extremely unlikely) for men to pursue this kind of thing. It's just that, according to my expertise on the subject, there has been no documented case of such a union between males. This is not to say there aren't any. In fact, romantic friendships among men actually existed back then.

However, that is not entirely the point here. For example, I noticed that ALL MEN (regardless of sexual orientation) are extremely uncomfortable, not just with their bodies pressed closely together, but also with expressing affection and genuine fondness for another man. For some reason, true (nonsexual) intimacy with each other sounds scary; among other things to ponder. That is why I'm going to devote the next fifteen entries exclusively to men, ending with a song titled "Guy Love".

But first, here's a very interesting article you should read. It is written by Heather Elizabeth Peterson. The main idea is that only in relatively recent times has it been assumed that romantic feelings can only exist where erotic feelings are present. However, this is not so. Her assertion states how people from the past held the belief that romance was compatible with friendship; that romantic love can exist alongside platonic feelings too. In other words, activities that we would now regard as romantic could fall on either end of the spectrum (Friends or lovers). And I explained this a bit in the previous entry titled, "Revelations: The Truth & Paradigm Shift". I just wanted to explore this in greater depth.

Yet, the heart of the article is trying to say the term "Romantic Friendship" is not just a code word for gay (although some gays/lesbians did hide under the guise of romantic friends), that it isn't really the stepchild of homoeroticism nor a 'cousin' of lesbianism; not even a subcategory of anything. Rather, it is trying to say romantic friendship really does have it's own distinctive features, and is truly a living force of its own, considered one of the highest forms of human emotion and behavior & worthy of profound sentiments! In fact, I believe the loss of romantic friendship was a loss to humanity.

Fox Mulder & Dana Scully

2009-10-03T09:56:00.001-07:00

TBA

Marie-Antoinette & Axel Fersen

2009-10-03T09:55:00.002-07:00

Marie-Antoinette and Axel Fersen: A Romantic Friendship
Written by Lisa Sanderson
Mar 31, 2009

Count Axel Fersen is mostly famous as the "alleged lover" of Marie-Antoinette. Historians disagree about whether they were lovers or not.

Nesta Webster, who wrote a biography of Marie Antoinette tried to put this theory to rest. But other biographers, such as Evelyn Lever, think that Fersen and Marie-Antoinette did have "an affair."

The son of Count von Fersen the Elder and the Countess De La Gardie; Fersen was born into the Swedish nobility. After being educated in Turin and Strasbourg, he distinguished himself by fighting for the French. He went to America as General Rochambeau’s adjutant where he distinguished himself at the siege of Yorktown in 1781. He became proprietary colonel of the Royal Swedish regiment in France.

~~Fersen and Marie Antoinette~~
Fersen and Marie Antoinette met at a masked ball in France when they were both very young. She was still the Dauphine or French Crown Princess. The Dauphine found the tall, handsome man very attractive. Years later, she remembered him and introduced him to the whole Court as an ‘old acquaintance.'

Fersen became the envoy of the Swedish King in France and became very good friends with the royal family. They saw each other at Court functions, played cards together, and Fersen became part of the Queen’s circle at the Petit Trianon. Here she escaped from her many problems, including court intrigues and vicious propaganda, by holding concerts, dances and plays, for her friends. Unfortunately, she was linked romantically with some of the men whom she met at the Trianon so her escape did not help. Fersen was not associated with Marie Antoinette in these rumors, perhaps because he had to spend years away doing military service and fulfilling his duties to the Swedish King.

~~Marie-Antoinette’s Attempted Escape~~
After the French Revolution Fersen helped the royal family escape to Varennes. Disguised as a coachman, he drove the carriage on the first leg of their journey. Unfortunately, the family was caught and dragged back to Paris, where they were imprisoned in the Tuileries. The King and Queen awaited trial by the revolutionaries.

~~The Romance of Marie Antoinette and Axel Fersen~~
There is no doubt that Marie Antoinette and Fersen were very attracted to each other. She wrote to him that: “I can tell you that I love you,” and he wrote to his sister that he could not marry because the woman who he wanted to marry was unavailable and called Marie Antoinette ‘perfect’. Some historians, such as Vincent Cronin and Antonia Fraser, suggest that they probably did become lovers at the Tuileries Palace. There is little evidence for this, however. Fersen wrote a French phrase in his diary after their meeting which was his usual phrase for sleeping with a lady. This phrase is apparently smudged so it really provides little evidence for the theory.

~~Fersen’s Death~~
Fersen supported the Swedish King Gustavus IV who was overthrown in a revolution of 1809. When the popular choice for King, Christian August, was poisoned and died, Fersen was believed by many to be responsible. He was murdered horribly by an angry mob in 1810.

A Twist On A Tale As Old As Time

2009-10-03T09:55:00.001-07:00

TBA

Opposite-Sex Romantic Friendships

2009-10-03T09:54:00.002-07:00

TBA

A New Hope

2009-10-03T09:54:00.001-07:00

At last, I found out "the truth", gained "a new insight" about the world around me, had a "paradigm shift" within me, and found "my purpose" in life. So what exactly do I want? Actually, a meaningful long-term (no, make that eternal) monogamous intimate romantic nonsexual relationship with my future ladylove. Of course, I'm very aware that my chances of finding her are a googol (yes, that's the very highest number in the mathematical language) to one. I've already accepted this grim fact. Yet, I have tremendous faith, and won't give up Hope.

I also realized another thing. The term, "Romantic Friendship" means so much more than "romantic activities" Friends do together. It took me a long while to see this. Yes, romantic friendship is really about intense loyalty and devotion towards one another, taking care of your Friend in sickness and in health, for richer or poorer, loving the other person on such a profound level, really putting up with each others' idiosyncrasies, making your Friendship the center of your lives, and that whatever happens, you are both willing to go through it together, no matter what.

So now I can stop mulling over whether to be straight, lesbian or single. Because there is a THIRD WAY of life... There is actually a THIRD CHOICE... That there is ANOTHER WAY... A DIFFERENT and UNIQUE path... one that doesn't cause me to have a guilty conscience or conflict with my deep-rooted beliefs and values.... And yes, that is Boston marriage/romantic friendship. Yes, I'm a Bostonian, and proud of it! Just one problem left: How do I find another Bostonian like me? Or more specifically, how do I find another Gabrielle (like me) in this modern world?? Because this kind of unique relationship is my highest truth, my highest hope, my grandest dream, and my grandest vision.

Ultimate Dilemma Resolved

2009-10-03T09:52:00.000-07:00

Once again, let's revisit my ultimate dilemma (please refer to the original entry at the beginning of my blog titled, "Ultimate Dilemma"). First, when I mentioned I just couldn't be a lesbian (and not exactly attracted to men either), then I'd have to practice celibacy and be alone/single for the rest of my life. That is one error here (remember celibacy just means "abstaining from sex" either for a short period of time or forever). So leading a life of celibacy is one thing, and being alone/single for the rest of your life is another thing. Yes, if people want they can:

Be celibate AND also happen to be single (not sexually active and also has nobody special in his/her life) Picture an old lonely lady with many cats in her apartment. Or picture me!!! Just kidding. I don't (and never) plan to be like this. Unfortunately, I'm in this stage for now.

Be celibate and NOT single (not sexually active, but the person has a committed partnership with someone/significant other) Picture Xena & Gabrielle in later seasons, Idgie & Ruth, Timon & Pumbaa, Bates & Katherine Coman; etc.

Be single and NOT celibate (person is sexually active without commitments) Picture friends with benefits, casual sex, prostitutes & men who have one night-stands.

Be NOT single and NOT celibate (sexually active and in a committed relationship as well) Picture couples, boyfriends/girlfriends & husbands/wives.

Now, I realize I can be celibate and still have a significant other in my life. Who says celibacy = alone/single? Actually, our cultural beliefs and notions imposed that on us. And it doesn't have to be that way.

Secondly, when I mentioned that I can be affectionate and desire to be nonsexually intimate with another woman (i.e. hug, touch, kiss, cuddle, hold hands), but associated that with lesbianism; that was another error here. Yes, while lesbians do this too, so what? Straight people do this also. Yes, I failed to realize that the term, "Romantic Friendship" includes almost all aspects of a modern heterosexual romantic relationship too. What's more, these kind of romantic activities are not reserved exclusively for sexual relationships (straight or gay). So, the "unwritten rule" that a person cannot have deep nonsexual intimacy with a nonsexual life partner is merely a cultural belief/notion that society imposed on us. And it doesn't have to be that way. And I explained this in great detail throughout my blog.

Yet, the most important thing I failed to realize was that people’s interpretation of physical contact became extraordinarily ‘privatized and sexualized,’ so that all types of touching, kissing, and holding were seen as sexual foreplay rather than accepted as ordinary means of communication that carried different meanings in different contexts (i.e. it can be done the motherly way, the friendly way, the greeting-each-other way, the comforting-each-other way, the celebrating-each-other way, the brotherly way, the romantic friendship way, and in the lovers' way which is sexual/erotic).

That's what cemented it for me. I finally realized how stupid I was. I failed to notice that WE ALL (spanning across sexual/affectional orientations of every kind) engage in touching, kissing, cuddling, holding and hugging to varying degrees. Let me ask you this... Why do you really think there are cuddle parties in certain places? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuddle_party). Yes, I failed to see that physical embracing is one of the most important ways that humans bond, learn to trust, one of the ways fears are allayed and hope is created; therefore it is a natural human desire to touch, enjoy body contact, to embrace and be embraced.

So this means I can be physically/emotionally affectionate with another woman (in the romantic friendship way). All the touching, kissing, words of endearment, whispering sweet nothings in her ear, cuddling, soul-gazing, hugging and holding (even if it's prolonged) can be done in a non-erotic way; it doesn't have to be seen as "foreplay". Instead, it should be seen as a nonsexual activity that can be enjoyed IN AND OF ITSELF! Who says it has to lead to anything else? It doesn't. Our cultural beliefs and notions imposed that on us (i.e. brainwashing people to believe if you get that intimate, it must therefore turn into a sexual encounter). And it doesn't have to be that way.

Finally, my ultimate dilemma is resolved. I've won The Battlefield of My Mind. The 12yr Rift-Saga of my life is over. It has finally ended. In a sense, my ID (which says, "oh go ahead and be lesbian; doesn't matter if it's a bit weird/wrong at least it is better than no relationship at all") and Ego (which says deep down "you shouldn't adopt lesbianism; even if that means you'll be alone for the rest of your life") are 100% reconciled in The Bitter Suite of My Soul. Now my conscience is at peace. Why? Because my ID & Ego have flushed out from the land of Illusia, and found themseleves sitting on a beautiful beach during sunset.

They were completely shocked. ID, Ego & Superego didn't know where they were located. But, I (the Ultimate-ego) approached them. All three hugged each other tightly. I told them not to be afraid. They stood up, and I explained everything to them. Suddenly, Ego burst out and cried, cried and cried. He was just so grateful not having to keep his son, ID, at bay any longer. Ego was also happy because

For the firt time ever (in Because I don't need to lead the heterosexual lifestyle, neither adopt the homosexual lifestyle NOR be alone for the rest of my life. I found "a whole new door". The funny thing is that I've been focusing too much on the other two doors labeled "straight & lesbian" that I didn't realize a "third door" has been opened. Yes, I've came such a long way. For instance, I went from thinking holding another woman's hand means you're a lesbian (rolls eyes) to knowing that not only I can be "emotionally drawn" to another woman, but also "fall in love" with her and even "marry" her, live together and raise kids. It’s actually possible to do alllll that without being "lesbian!"

A Small (And Extremely Rare) Online Community

2009-10-03T09:51:00.001-07:00

Another thing, I've read all about "asexual lesbians." In fact, there are approximately 250 documented cases of this in the world. And it continues to grow everyday. But, when I look at the term, I go eh??? I laugh out loud because I do "behave exactly" like an asexual lesbian. It is also PRETTY CLOSE to describing who I am. But, not quite hitting the target (it's about one inch away from bullseye). Ya know what I mean? When I saw it, I cocked my head to the side and said, "Wow, not so bad!" I even became a member in a small online community at http://z4.invisionfree.com/Asexual_Lesbians/index.php

The reason I joined? **Chuckles** My life is a "perfect imitation" of an asexual lesbian. After all, I never had sex nor oral sex, and I am interested in women (not men). I like girls; I constantly talk to them, flirt in a subtle way, and hang out with them whenever I can. To the best of my knowledge, all my typical female friends (in real-life) that I have happen to be straight. But hey, you never know. **Winks** Alas, a "Gabrielle" or a "Xena" may be in the midst somewhere. For your information, no, I never kissed or held hands with a girl before. But, I instinctively know I am this way. And I'm still a hopeless romantic; a Gabrielle still searching for my Xena.

However, I always thought this label was a misnomer. Why do you think I never use it in my blog/journal? **Rolls eyes** Asexual lesbian? First of all, I'm not an asexual. That's totally crazy. I do actually have a sex drive (sexuality). It is just not directed at anyone in particular. But, yes, I do get horny and occasionally masturbate. To all of those readers (especially my regular followers) who are dying to know; yes I've had intense clitoral orgasms. Yeah, it feels great, but I'm not into this whole 'sex thing.' Like in the insane and obsessed media. Not really. Sure, it's interesting, but it is not what's on my mind.

Second of all, I'm not a lesbian (at least not in the biblical sense). I never had engaged in any kind of homosexual acts in my entire life. The reason I identify with "lesbianism" is because I have emotional & romantic attractions to women only. It has always been this way my whole life. But, I didn't know what "it meant" until I learned of the terms Romantic Friendship and Boston Marriage (back in 2007).

Nevertheless, asexual lesbianism (the terminology itself) was a phrase I grew to know and love. In a very personal way. Yes, I know, I know, I know, I'm not an asexual NOR a lesbian. But, put two and two together (like 1 + 1 = 2), and the whole weird concept finally MAKES PERFECT SENSE to me! Finding that rare website was like finding my 'long-lost tribe' or my own 'secret garden.' I was sooooo relieved that there were other women who were like me out there. That I wasn't going crazy. That I wasn't 'all alone' in this world (stuck with my own unique ideas). Because there are actual hundreds of people scattered worldwide who share my similar (if not nearly identical) feelings.

But no, for your information, I don't think of myself in that way. I identify myself with the relationship between Xena & Gabrielle (the love they shared). Totally nameless. You see, I feel my love towards women (that I like romantically) really does go beyond words/categories/labels. But, yes, if you want to get "more concrete" then think of me as an "asexual lesbian." I don't mind at all. However, the terms (and also being a) homo-romantic & homo-emotional, sound wayyyyy better to my ears and to my lifestyle in general.

[draft stage process not finsihed]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In fact, I used to be straight (I didn't know any better). It all happened literally seven years ago. Practically ancient history. It was during a time I didn't know who I was (deep down). And going 'out with guys' was the normal thing to do. I once had a boyfriend. His name was Brian. He was a good fellow, and I liked him very much. Again, we never had sex nor oral sex. We just made out and held hands. Our actual relationship wasn't even serious. We only saw each other on the weekends (we went to vastly different high schools), and our relationship lasted A MERE seven months. It was nice, okay and went smoothly. I basically had a wonderful time! No problems, dramas or traumas. He treated me with the uttermost respect. Brian was a rare (and sweet) gentleman indeed. We broke up because we had to go to universities in different states. But, THE REAL truth is, we weren't genuinely in love in the first place. Still, we remained good friends long afterwards. We eventually lost touch three years ago. I never regretted any of this. Not one bit. It was quite an enjoyable and (most importantly) a rich learning experience! Of course, I'm totally over him 100%, but I'll always keep these fond memories. You see, obviously I had to know "who I was not" in order to know "who I am." It is small wonder then, he was my EARLIEST, FIRST, ONLY, and LAST boyfriend.

Affectional Orientation

2009-10-03T09:50:00.001-07:00

Affectional orientation is an alternative term for sexual orientation. It is based on the perspective that one's orientation is not limited to sexuality but also to one's affectionality. To holders of this view, one's orientation is defined by whom one is predisposed to fall in love with, sexual attraction being only a part of a larger dynamic.

The term is also used by some who consider themselves asexual and only feel emotional attraction to describe the gender or genders they are romantically attracted to. The terms used for different affectional orientations are typically the same as those which are used for sexual orientations: homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual (though actually "homoromantic", "biromantic" and "heteroromantic" are not unknown, if uncommon).

Lately, the aforementioned terms are considered to reduce a whole category of desires and emotions, power and connection, to sex.

There are also those who hold the view that their orientation is defined by whom one has affection towards and that their sexual attraction is based on affection for another human being's personal qualities rather than their gender or appearance, sex and gender playing no part in the attraction. This does not necessarily require either person to fall in love but is still based on a personal affection.

One might now consider the phrase, "conditional sexual attraction" for asexuals, as opposed to "primary sexual attraction" used by all "sexual" people, though not all would agree with this terminology, as some asexuals may be attracted to physical characteristics as well as or instead of non physical ones.

I thought the various definitions were great. According to me, I am strictly a 100% homoromantic/homoemotional only, of course. For me, these two (2) "newly discovered" terminologies are totally synonymous to Romantic Friendship too. I am not sexually attracted to women (don't want to nor care to engage in sex/lust or erotica activities with them); but I am very much physically attracted to them (as in wanting to be physically close to her, all the cuddling, kissing, constant nonsexual intimate touching; etc). What I am attracted to (specifically) is their soft skin, silky hair, smooth hands, gentle arms, pretty face, and nice lips. I don't care for "sexy boobs", "big butts", and "wet vaginas" never cross my mind (when I look at ladies). So, how can I be sexually attracted to them?? That's ridiculous. I am physically attracted to them; NOT SEXUALLY attracted. There is a particular distinction between the two terms. If anything, my so-called "sexual attraction" towards women are based on their inner qualities, personalities and characteristic traits (physical and also emotional aspects). FYI, I prefer feminine looks with a light touch of butchness in them **winks**

Anyway, if I were sexually attracted to chicks (for real), I would have pics of naked females all over my room (or at least naked pictures of them secretly hidden under my bed). But, this is NOT THE CASE. For some reason, I only seem to want to put up photos of fully-clothed and normal looking pretty women (hanging on my wall); mostly showing their faces and upper torsos. Among the posters I have (in my own bedroom) are of Allison Mack, Amy Jo Johnson, Sally Field, Sandra Bullock, Mariska Hargitay, Helen Hunt, Caroline Rhea, Carrie Fisher, Sasha Cohen, Dana Torres, Diane Lane, Deanne Bray, Demi Moore, Donna, Gillian Anderson, Patty Duke, Anne Bancroft, Leelee Sobieski, Glenn Close, Amanda Laura Bynes, Mary Stuart Masterson, Jamie Lee Curtis, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Lucy Lawless and Renee O'Connor (duh, of course). My collection of pretty ladies will not be complete without these two gals. And yes, I do have romantic crushes on all 25 of them (to varying degrees).

I mean, having pretty shapes/figures are nice to look at. And I DO look at them (sometimes even stare). I'm not shy to admit this. There is nothing wrong with admiring; to gaze and wonder at the overall beauty of the female body. It is a work of art, indeed!

Revelations II: Paradigm Shift

2009-10-03T09:47:00.001-07:00

All of a sudden, I had a huge paradigm shift within me. Now, I know what it really means to be a homosexual. The real definition of homosexuality is not today’s definition (false), but from thousands of years ago (the true one). For instance, it doesn't mean a guy standing in a certain body posture, speaking in a high-pitched tone, feminine qualities and movements of hands, a guy saying “pink” is his favorite color, likes to play with dolls or that his job is a florist and/or interior decorator or that he loves to dance, cuddle or kiss another guy, sleep with the guy in the same bed (because that can be done nonsexually too), having emotional and/or romantic attractions, send love letters and thoughtful poems, taking baths or two guys living together for life. All that is NOT HOMOSEXUAL AND NOT "GAY".

The same goes for women. For instance, it doesn't mean a girl standing in a certain body posture, speaking in a lower-pitched tone, masculine qualities and movements of their hands, a girl saying “blue” is her favorite color, likes to play with action figures or that her job is in construction work or that she loves to dance, cuddle or kiss another girl, sleep with the girl in the same bed (because that can be done nonsexually too), having emotional and/or romantic attractions, send love letters and thoughtful poems, taking baths or two women living together for life. All that is NOT HOMOSEXUAL AND NOT "LESBIAN".

In the bible, God said being a homosexual SPECIFICALLY means a man HAVING SEX with another man (same rule applies to women). That IS ALL God focused on, period. If you read the bible closely, you would know. Yes, today’s definition of “homosexuality” is totally messed up and because of this, everyone became very confused. They had decided to ignore God’s true definition of homosexuality from ancient times (which includes sex/lust only), and make up their very own. As a result, today's "updated version" defining homosexuality (after thousands of years later) has changed so much that people demanded a "new label" to incorporate all these (false) "additional features" of homosexuality and named it "Gay" and "Lesbian". I now realize these two "modern phrases" are invalid in the eyes of the Lord. In fact, these so-called terms were coined less than two hundred years ago (in the year 1890 to be exact; and wasn't even put to "real" usage until approximately the 1970's to mean "something else"). So we have to remember, once again, that only God (and Jesus Christ) Himself had strictly coined the term "Homosexuality." Indeed, that is THE ONLY term He uses, period.

But, mankind had coined the term "Gay." Because of this as a result, "gayness and lesbianism" has extended to many, many other things including touching, kissing, holding, certain body movements, voice tones, style of clothing/attire, hobbies, who you live with, jobs and occupations, and even slang phrases. For example, Jack says to Jill, "The lifeguard told us to swim in shallow waters today because of the red flag. I think its a good idea; so I'm only going up to my knees." Jill sarcastically responds back saying, "Oh, don't be sooooo gay!" Jack therefore feels unnecessarily threatened, hurt and insecure (over nothing). Obviously, in this context, "gay" actually just means being "uncool/nerdy." Sadly, people have forgotten what “gay” truly means, and that’s a shame!

Homosexuality: Once originally an action verb, has now become [for some weird reason] further extended to a noun, pronoun, adjective, adverb, irregular verb, preposition, conjunction, interjection, superlative, and even a predicate nominative. "Gay" is also used in informal conversations (as illustrated above) which, sadly, has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality. So yes in other words, unfortunately (and ironically), we are severely limiting ourselves; not God. In fact, I bet He is looking down at us and laughing Himself silly.

There is another thing I want to discuss... It now makes perfect sense why God condemns male homosexuality, but THIS VERY SAME GOD has absolutely no problem with same-sex love, intimacy and commitment. For instance, two men openly expressed their intense love for each other (saying that their "love" even surpasses that of women!!), kissed, wept together, and on top of all that, the men declared their soulmate bond!! (remember the David-Jonathan story). God even wanted that recorded in the bible and said nothing negative about this. It also makes perfect sense why God condemns female homosexuality, but THIS VERY SAME GOD has absolutely no problem with two women making life vows to each other (or a very serious commitment), even using verses similar in traditional weddings!! (remember the Naomi-Ruth story). In fact, these two events were portrayed in a very positive light. It also makes perfect sense why God condemns homosexuality, but THIS VERY SAME GOD is absolutely silent about same-sex marriages (you can scan from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation, and not see even a single same-sex marriage mentioned). And guess what?? That also goes for almost virtually everything else. But, on here, I'll list just the basics:

You can scan from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation (in the bible), and not see any rule whatsoever forbidding same-sex hand holding.

You can scan from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation (in the bible), and not see any rule whatsoever forbidding same-sex kissing.

You can scan from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation (in the bible), and not see any rule whatsoever forbidding same-sex touching.

In other words, you can scan from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation (in the bible), and not see any rule whatsoever forbidding romantic same-sex activities (of virtually all kinds; you name it). It doesn't even bother Him, and He is perfectly fine with it. How can this be? Let me explain. First of all, God knows perfectly well that touching/hand-holding/kissing between angels, humans or other forms of intelligent life in the universe are ordinary means of communication (as old as time) that can be carried out in different meanings in different contexts (not just only in the sexual dimension). That is the key phrase here. In DIFFERENT MEANINGS within DIFFERENT CONTEXTS. So therefore, same-sex touching, kissing & hand-holding doesn't always necessarily mean sexual.

Second of all, God knows perfectly well that a person can "fall in love" with another person of the same gender (nonsexually). Yes, God is very aware of the fact there are different kinds of love, and wants us to know that romantic love need not be accompanied by erotic love.

There is a difference between:
1.) platonic love (simply loving & affectionate feelings only)
2.) erotic love (mostly characterized by sex, lust & erotica)
3.) erotic romantic love (romantic loving/affectionate feelings plus sex, lust/erotica)
4.) platonic romantic love (romantic loving and affectionate feelings without sex/lust/erotica)

Number (4) is the "love" that society has long forgotten. And that is called romantic friendship. Although the actual phrase looks like an oxymoron, it is actually possible to have platonic & romantic feelings simultaneously. Yes, I can actually fall in love with another woman (and love her very passionately), the same as with a boyfriend or husband, just without the "sex/lust/erotica” element. In a sense, (since the sex is left out of the equation) it’d give us more “space and room”, in making our romantic love/intimate Friendship much stronger and more intense. In fact, my love for her will very easily surpass the love of men (even though it isn’t sexual). Unfortunately this concept is very hard to understand... for most people. Now, you can see why God does not forbid (romantic) same-sex love (because "falling in love" can be nonerotic, and that a 'passionate love' doesn't always necessarily mean 'sexual love').

Third of all, God does not forbid same-sex marriages and lifelong same-sex unions. In fact, in the bible He loves it and blesses those who practice this (rare) third way of life. I'm also an extremely strong advocate and supporter of same-sex marriages/unions (without the sexual aspect), and I believe it should be legally recognized and respected very much; in exactly the same way like traditional marriages are. I'll use women as an example (because this rare phenomenon is much more common with them). Remember, a woman can actually "marry" another woman, put her "first" (as a significant other), do all the stuff together as a couple (shop, bathe, eat and sleep together, even adopt and raise children if they wanted), also nurture each other with all the care and affection, etc (i.e. Boston marriages) All this can be done nonsexually, and women have done this in the past many times. This very same thing can apply to men as well. God does not forbid this. As long as the same-sex couple are not sexually involved (and not lusting after one another), NOTHING IS WRONG with this kind of lifestyle in God's eyes. So what I'm trying to say is that God does not forbid same-sex marriages and lifelong same-sex unions. But, He does forbid homosexuality. So we can arrive at the logical conclusion that He also forbids "same-sex HOMOSEXUAL marriages and lifelong same-sex HOMOSEXUAL unions." There is a particular (and huge) distinction between the two.

Lastly, I also experienced another important paradigm shift regarding orientations. Since there is nothing sexual about romantic friendships/Boston marriages, it doesn't belong in the sexual orientation category. But still, this nonsexual institution is too big and important; it needs some kind of a category to fall into. And there is one. In fact, it belongs in the "affectional orientation" category. Yes, that's where I belong. This is a 'real term', I didn't make this up. It is based on the perspective that one's orientation is defined by whom one is predisposed to fall in love with (emotionally and romantically), sex not really playing a part in the attraction. Now I realize orientations are not just limited to the "sexual" category, and that there are actually TWO different kinds of orientations; not just one.

As you can see, Romantic Friendship & Boston Marriage are in perfect accordance (and in perfect harmony) with biblical scriptures!

Revelations I: The Truth

2009-10-03T09:46:00.000-07:00

One day, I was reading the bible and decided to look again at the part what God said about homosexuality (and please pay attention to the words I underlined). Before I begin, I must make it clear that my purpose is NOT to condemn or judge homosexuals (only God can do that). My purpose is in finding out what it REALLY MEANS to be a homosexual (gay/lesbian), and WHAT EXACTLY is wrong about it. After reading the bible, and already knowing about romantic friendships and Boston marriages, everything started to fall into place. It made perfect sense. In fact, that is all God had to say. His words became crystal clear to me. I knew THE TRUTH.

“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind." Of course, this goes both ways. God clearly forbids not only gay sex, but lesbian sex as well. And when we see the word "lie", it doesn't mean to simply lie with the same gender in bed side by side (because that can be done nonsexually; mothers and daughters do it, brothers and sisters do it, friends do it, and even close romantic friends do it). The word "lie" mentioned in the bible is not to be used in a literal sense. It actually means to "lie sexually with", "have sex with", etc.

In Romans 1:26-27 Paul is very specific, “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections." The term "vile" literally means showing affection in an erotic and sexual sense, and that it is a dishonor, a disgrace and shameful.

"For even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust toward another." Obviously, you can see that "leaving the natural use" means that instead of the person having sex with the opposite sex, they had sex with the same-sex individual, which is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord.

"Men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.” What is that error exactly? A very simple and natural, logical error. Their bodies (in a sexual way) automatically contradict and repel each other or more specifically, their genitals. For example, the male sexual organ. Obviously, a penis isn't designed to go inside an anus of another male. Not only it is usually uncomfortable (that is why gays sometimes put lots of lube), there is also a common risk of "tearing and breaking" of anal tissue. So, you can clearly see the error which was meet. Also, do you remember the child’s game of matching the round peg into the round hole, the square peg into the square hole, etc.? The homosexual (gay/lesbian), is trying to force two pegs together, in blatant disregard for God’s natural design! Thus, homosexuality has no scientific or anatomical basis for existence.

In 1 Corinthians 6:9, Paul wrote, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.” The Greek word for “effeminate” is malakos, which literally means something soft to the touch, BUT it is actually a negative metaphor to refer to a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man. As you can see, the word "effeminate" does not mean a man acting in a feminine (or girlish) way. It has nothing to do with a man having female qualities.

Now, let's look at the phrase: “abusers of themselves with mankind”, which completely summarizes the whole thing. It not only refers to homosexuality, but also to fornicators, adulterers, rapists, molesters, prostitutes, bestiality, incest, idolaters, liars, thieves, murderers, covetous, sloth (excessive laziness), gluttony, drunkards, revilers (saying very hurtful things to someone or hate speech), swindlers and extortioners. And it also refers to those who have pride (thinking too highly of oneself), greed (strong emotional attachments to worldly possessions), lust, wrath, envy, extravagance (frequent purchase of luxury goods), and vainglory (unjustified boasting).

Now, you must be asking me: "What is the point you're trying to make? That homosexuals do not inherit the kingdom of God?" No, this blog entry has nothing to do with whether gays go to heaven or hell.

Again, the point I'm trying to make is figuring out what "homosexual" truly means, and what very, very specifically God forbids regarding homosexuals. Look at the words I underlined.... Don't you see? What is the constant theme here? SEX, LUST, and EROTICA. What is God saying over and over again about homosexuality? What exactly does God forbid? SEX (in the broad sense of the word). While He doesn't exactly forbid lust/erotica, He dislikes it very much, and it is for good reason. You see, when a person starts to lust after the same-sex and have erotic thoughts about him/her, the person is more likely than ever to act on it. So lust/erotica isn't a very smart thing. Remember this... The "thought" is the parent of the "action". That's why God strongly discourages it.

In short, the ONLY THING God forbids is SEX. I remember repeating this line many times in my head. I went from, "Oh, so that what's wrong about gays/lesbians", to "That's the ONLY THING WRONG about homosexuals!?" Oh, wow... I was in a state of complete shock. Because I just realized "sex" or more specifically "genital sex" is actually a very small part of the whole love equation stuff (whether you're straight or gay). Yes, believe it or not! The only thing God forbids about homosexuality is sex. In that moment, THE TRUTH has set me free!

The Bostonians' Ten Commandments

2009-10-03T09:43:00.000-07:00

Moving on, what do you call people who are in Boston marriages? I've tried looking everywhere for the word, but realized it doesn't exist. That is why I have invented a term for those who practice this third way of life. They are called the "Bostonians." Yes, these people are "straight" in a sense; they just don't practice the lifestyle which includes a husband, 2.5 kids and a white picket fence (you get the idea). Anyway, in order to be a true Bostonian (whether you are in an artistic collaboration, business partnership, romantic friendship or choosing all three), you ladies both must follow the Bostonians' Ten Commandments which are:

Thou Shall Not Have:
1.) Vaginal Sex (i.e. with dildos)
2.) Oral Sex
3.) Anal Sex
4.) Dry Sex
5.) Cyber Sex
6.) Manual Sex
7.) Mutual Masturbation
8.) French/Tongue Kissing
9.) Touching Of Sexual Body Parts
10.) Lustful Thoughts About Each Other

(Laughs) I know, a bit silly but kind of humorous. Anyway, let's talk about the ninth rule, "thou shall not have touching of sexual body parts." There are exceptions in certain situations. For example, what if your significant other becomes permanently disabled (God forbid) and cannot wash herself "up and down there?" You could do it in the same manner as a home nurse would. There is nothing wrong with that. Another one is the buttocks. Of course, you can slap/grab each other's butts in a playful way. Football players do it, friends do it. So what I mean is not touching the buttocks in a sexual manner. I'm just saying these things in case somebody brings up those "what if" questions, trying to challenge my ideas.

There is another thing I want to discuss. It may look like I am really introducing a very "boring" and "dull" third way of life. You may think there isn't much you can do with each other nonsexually, only envisioning a life of simply holding hands and kissing. Not true! That is because you are blocking yourself from seeing it. This is a medical (and psychological) condition known as "narrow tunnel vision."

For instance, you can have intimate tight bear hugs, hold hands with fingers intertwined, run your fingers through each other's hair, slow dance to soft music, give each other passionate kisses (whether it's a peck on the lips or kissing for an extended period of time) as long as you're not frenchin', sleep in bed together embracing from head to toe (fully/partially clothed of course), cuddle and spoon on the couch, playfully nibble her ears and neck, soul gaze (looking deeply into each other's eyes), send each other exotic flowers and write passionate poems, have relaxing and fun romantic baths together (just like Xena & Gabby did in the episodes: "A Day In The Life" and "The God You Know"), carve your initials into trees, have a romantic picnic, hold each other while watching a beautiful sunset, tickle her feet with yours, give each other Eskimo kisses, work on meaningful projects together in which your brains beat as passionately as your hearts, give each other soothing massages, go for a romantic walk in the moonlight, give each other cute love-bite marks, go on exciting adventures, have deep intimate soul-bearing conversations (and feel like you just had an "emotional orgasm" when its over), have fancy romantic candlelight dinners, nonsexually caress and fondle one another, make up unique pet names for each other, and so so much more! If you two really think, you both may just find many other creative ways to show love and affection. The list can be endless!

P.S. Yep, I believe playful pillow fights should also be included in that list!!! **Smile**

Reaction To Pagan Kennedy's Article

2009-10-03T09:42:00.000-07:00

As you can see, there are several types of Boston marriages: business partnership, artistic collaboration, and sometimes it is a friendship nurtured with all the care that we usually squander on our mates — a friendship as it could be if we made it the center of our lives (and that's what romantic friendship also means). It is completely up to you to decide which one you want. In my opinion, Boston marriage combined with romantic friendship is the most intimate thing of all.... and that would be the rarest and most precious kind of Friendship!

Notice I left out the lesbians. Yes, I'm very aware and do recognize these women have loving and affectionate relationships (which is very real), but it's also sexual. That is why they belong in lesbian relationships, not in Boston marriages. Please remember that this social institution is supposed to be nonsexual (and the majority of them are). There is no reason for lesbians to hide behind Boston marriages, and they shouldn't. Our society today has become very accepting of lesbians, even allowing same-sex gay marriages, and that is where they belong. I totally respect it as well.

So, Are You Two Together? (Part 5)

2009-10-03T09:41:00.000-07:00

Liz sashays into the kitchen, a shopping bag crinkling under her arm. "I bought you these," she says, "because you've been wearing those mismatched gloves with holes in them."

I slide on the mittens, and my hands turn into fuzzy paws, pink and red with a touch of gold. "I love them," I say, and hug her, patting her back with my fuzz. She laughs and shifts her eyes away, a bit embarrassed by her own generosity. "I couldn't have my roommate going around in shabby gloves," she says.

She uses the word "roommate." But I know what she means.

So, Are You Two Together? (Part 4)

2009-09-22T18:53:00.000-07:00

Liz's love, a theoretical physicist, meanders down our street clapping. Standing beside a triple-decker house, he cocks his head, listening to the sharp sounds reverberating off of a vinyl-sided wall. He's designing an exercise for the students in the "Physics of Music" class that he's assistant-teaching. When he's done, he'll come back inside to find Liz and me draped across the sofa, discussing urban sprawl. We'll all make dinner together, and if I feel like it, I might join them for a night out, or I might head off with the guy that I'm seeing.

I date scientists too, men who understand what it is to experiment, to question and wonder. Liz's love or mine might sit in our kitchen scrawling equations into a notebook, or disappear for days to orbit with subatomic particles or speak with machines. These men are wise enough to see that the Boston marriage works to their advantage. Liz and I keep each other company. Our Boston marriage has made it easier for us to enjoy the men in our lives.

But how do we commit to each other, knowing that someday one of us may marry? One of us might fall in love with something other than a man — a solar cabin in Mexico, a job in Tangier, a documentary film project in Florida, a year of silence in the Berkshire woods. Any number of things could pull us apart. We have made no promises to each other, signed no agreements to commit. For some reason, that seems O.K. most of the time.

For this article, I talked to many women who'd formed platonic marriages or who'd thought about it seriously. All of them discussed the complicated issues of commitment, or lack thereof, between friends.

Janet calls her arrangement with Greta intentional. "In the same vein as creating an 'intentional community,' we have an 'intentional' living arrangement," she says. The two high school friends, both straight women in their early thirties, moved to Boston together five years ago, knowing that they would share an apartment, and a life. They eat dinner together and check in with the how-was-your-day conversation most people expect from a mate.

"Greta is the person I say to contact when I fill out emergency cards," Janet tells me. "She is the first person I would turn to if I needed help. "

And yet, the two have left their future open, and the promises they have made to each other are full of what-ifs. If Greta doesn't marry by the time she's 35, they might raise a child together. It's the what-ifs that drive many women away from closeness with each other.

One married woman, I'll call her Lisa, says she's deeply disappointed with the way women treat their friendships as disposable, dumping friends when an erotic partner comes along. "Even though my friends and I used to talk about buying a house together, we all knew at some level that it wasn't going to work. Ultimately, we would betray each other, find a man, marry him. I got married because I knew everybody else was going to. If I knew I could trust a friendship with a woman — that there was a way of making a friendship into a bona fide, future-oriented relationship — I would rather have that than be married."

As for me, I've come to think of commitment as something beyond a marriage contract, a joint bank account, or even a shared child. I know that eventually Liz and I may drift to other houses, other cities. Yet I can picture us reuniting at age 80, to settle down in an old-age home together. Maybe we will have husbands, maybe not, but we'll still be conspirators. We'll probably harangue the youngsters who spoon spinach onto our plates about the importance of forming a union; we'll attend protests with signs duct-taped to our walkers; maybe we'll write an opera and perform it using some newfangled technology that lets us float in the air. Liz and I are committed. We share a vision of the kind of people we want to be and the world we want to inhabit.

"We formed a family core with the possibility of exhilaration," wrote Zoe Zolbrod in her article. "Yet Hallmark never even named a goddamn holiday after us, can you believe it?" We're not sure what to call ourselves. We have no holidays. We don't know what our future holds. We have only love and the story we are making up together.

So, Are You Two Together? (Part 3)

2009-09-22T18:45:00.001-07:00

Recently, at a party, I met a thirtysomething academic who has settled alone in a small town outside of Boston. "I can step right out my door and cross-country ski," she told me. "But I'm lonely a lot." Around us, people sweated and threw their arms wildly in time to an old Prince song. The academic wedged her hands into her jeans pockets, and her eyes skated past my face and scanned the room.

If you're lonely, get a roommate, I suggested. Move into a group house. "No," she sighed. "I'm too old for that. I'm set in my ways." What if you marry? I asked. She laughed. "That's different."

She might be speaking for thousands, millions of women all over this country. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, one out of four households in 1995 had only one member, a figure expected to rise sharply as the population ages. I see the future of single women, and frankly, it depresses the hell out of me. We're isolating ourselves in condos and studio apartments. And why? Sometimes because we need to bask in solitude — and that's fine. But other times, it's because we're afraid to get too comfortable with our friends. What if you bought a house with your best friend, opened a joint bank account with her, raised a child? Where would your bedmate fit into the scheme? This is where the platonic marriage — for all its loveliness — may force you to make some difficult choices and rethink your ideas about commitment.

So, Are You Two Together? (Part 2)

2009-09-22T18:15:00.000-07:00

Several years ago, I fell in love with a man because of all he carried — he would show up for the night with five plastic bags rattling on his arm, and then proceed to unpack, strewing possessions everywhere. The next day, I'd find his orange juice in the refrigerator, his sweater tucked into my bureau, a software program installed on my computer. Night after night, he installed himself in my apartment.

At first, every one of these discoveries charmed me — his way of saying, "I need to be with you." But one morning, I surveyed my bedroom — guy's underwear on the floor, books about artificial intelligence stacked on the night table, a jar of protein powder on the shelf — and realized that I had a live-in boyfriend. And that he and I had completely different ideas about what we wanted from a living space. He thought of an apartment as a desktop where we could scatter papers, coffee mugs, and computer parts. What I regarded as a mess, he saw as a filing system that should under no circumstances be disturbed. Meanwhile, I drove him crazy by hosting political meetings in our living room, inviting ten people over for dinner at the last minute. We loved one another, but that didn't mean we should share an apartment.

And then — when our Felix-Oscar dynamic seemed insurmountable — I picked up a magazine called Maxine and stumbled across an article that gripped me. Written by 27-year-old Zoe Zolbrod, it celebrated the passion that flashes up between women, even when they are both straight: "I would meet women who I would need to know with an urgency so crushing it gave the crush its name. And in knowing them I would feel a rush of power and possibility, of total self, that seemed much more real to me than heterolove," Zolbrod wrote. When she met her friend V, "it was like finding the person you think you'll marry." The two moved in together. They took care of each other, became family, called each other "my love" and "my roommate" interchangeably.

I remember reading that article and thinking, "yes." I adored my boyfriend, but he and I had never meshed in the way that Zolbrod described. We tried to make a home together, but we didn't agree on what a home should be.

Years later, when our love fizzled into friendship and he moved out, I made a vow to myself: I would not drift into a domestic situation again. Instead, I would find someone who shared my passion for turning a house into a community center — with expansive meals, weekend guests, clean counters, flowers, art projects, activist gatherings, a backyard garden, and a pile of old bikes on the porch, available to anyone needing to borrow some wheels.

My friend Liz seemed like the right person. And so I proposed to her. Did she want to be a co-creator of the performance art piece that we would call "home"? She did.

So, Are You Two Together? (Part 1)

2009-09-22T18:06:00.000-07:00

Liz is explaining the situation to some guy in customer service.
"My roommate and I need to network our computers together," she's saying, seated at the other desk in the office that we share.

The word "roommate" jumps out at me. It's an inadequate word, but it's all we have. What else do you call two friends who are shacked up together in a decaying Victorian, run several businesses and one nonprofit group out of its rooms, host political meetings under oil portraits of Puritan and Jewish ancestors, cook kale and tofu meals for all who stop by, go to parties as a couple, and spend holidays with each other's families? If we were lesbians-as people sometimes assume us to be —we would fit more neatly into a box. But we're straight.

In the year and a half we've lived together, I have struggled with the namelessness of our situation. The word "roommate" conjures up a college dorm, scuff marks on the floors from hundreds of anonymous occupants, locks on all the doors, the refrigerator Balkanized into zones where you can or cannot put your food, Death Metal blasting from the speakers down the hall. It means transience and 20 years old. It does not mean love or family.

Words offer shelter. They help love stay. I wish for a word that two friends could live inside, like a shingled house with faded Persian rugs. Sometimes, in an attempt to make our relationship sound more valid, I tell people Liz and I are in a "Boston marriage." The usual response is, "You're in a what?"

It's an antique phrase, dating back to the 1800s. In Victorian times, women who wanted to maintain their independence and freedom opted out of marriage and often paired up to live together, acting as each other's "wives" and "helpmeets." Henry James's 1886 novel about such a liaison, The Bostonians, may have been the inspiration for the term, or perhaps it was the most glamorous female couples who made their homes in Boston, including Sarah Orne Jewett, a novelist, and her "wife" Annie Adams Fields, also a writer.

Were they gay? Was the "Boston marriage" simply a code word for lesbian love? Historian Lillian Faderman says this is impossible to determine, because nineteenth-century women who kept diaries drew curtains over their bedroom windows. They did not bother to mention whether their ecstatic friendship spilled over into — as Faderman so romantically puts it — "genital sex." And ladies, especially well-to-do ones who poured tea with their pinkies raised, were presumed to have no sex drive at all. Women could share a bed, nuzzle in public, and make eyes at each other, and these cooings were considered to be as innocent as schoolgirl crushes.

So, at least in theory, the Boston marriage indicated a platonic, albeit nerdy relationship. With ink-stained fingers, the Victorian roommate-friends would smear jam on thick slices of bread and then lounge across from each other in bohemian-shabby leather armchairs to discuss a novel-in-progress or a political speech they'd just drafted. Their brains beat as passionately as their hearts. The arrangement often became less a marriage than a commune of two, complete with a political agenda and lesson plan.

"We will work at [learning German] together — we will study everything," proposes Olive, a character in The Bostonians, to her ladylove. Olive imagines them enjoying "still winter evenings under the lamp, with falling snow outside, and tea on a little table, and successful renderings . . . of Goethe, almost the only foreign author she cared about; for she hated the writing of the French, in spite of the importance they have given to women." James poked fun at Olive's bookworm passion. But he lavished praise on his own sister Alice's intense and committed friendship with another woman, which he considered to be pure, a perfect devotion.

Most likely, the Boston marriage was many things to many women: business partnership, artistic collaboration, lesbian romance. And sometimes it was a friendship nurtured with all the care that we usually squander on our mates — a friendship as it could be if we made it the center of our lives.

"I am on my way through the green lane to meet you, and my heart goes scampering so, that I have much ado to bring it back again, and learn it to be patient, till that dear Susie comes," Emily Dickinson wrote to her friend — and maybe lover — Sue Gilbert. Today I see tragedy in these words, for Sue ended up married to Emily's brother, and the women never had a chance to build a life around their love. I find myself wishing I could teleport them to our own time, so that Emily D. and her Susie might find an apartment in San Francisco together, fly a rainbow flag out front, shop at Good Vibrations, and delight one another with dildos in shocking shades of pink. And yet, it's not that simple. When I read the passionate letters between nineteenth-century women, I become keenly aware of what I'm missing, of how much richer Victorian friendships must have been. While our sex lives have ballooned in the last hundred years, our friendships have grown stunted. Why don't I shower my favorite girls with kisses and "mash" notes, hold hands with them as we skip down the street, or share a sleeping bag? We don't touch anymore. We don't dare admit how our hearts scamper.

Reflections

2009-09-22T18:00:00.000-07:00

Now, do you remember when Shere Hite was thinking of proposing a "Third Way Of Life?" She wasn't. In fact, she was trying to BRING BACK that third way of life which is Boston marriage, and modernize it. Of course, today women will realize they both have a sex drive (unlike the past when they probably had no clue), but so what? It doesn't mean they have to "act on it". And of course, the reason the women would live together in a Boston marriage today is NOT BECAUSE marrying a man will lead to a lifetime of servitude (this is the 21st century!), but because they deeply love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together. And when they do, they'll realize how special their union is. As Dr. Dennison quoted from her "Smart At Love" website, "...And I understand now how precious and rare it is to feel that close to someone who isn’t also a sexual partner."

Next, I will show you an article in Ms. Magazine about a very modern-day Boston marriage (living-together friendship) between two straight women, from a first-person point of view. Just to let you know, in this one it is mostly an artistic collaboration (and they left their futures open). However, within the article you will find other types of Boston marriages, including the one that goes with romantic friendship (read about 27-year-old Zoe Zolbrod and her Friend V).

The Bee Charmer From Alabama

2009-09-22T17:54:00.001-07:00

Fried Green Tomatoes (FGT) is a story about friendship, and the love that goes into the relationship of special friends (that is, romantic friendship). But, it is also so much more. It’s a story of triumph in the face of adversity. It’s a murder mystery and a down-home tall tale. It’s a drama with comic moments. It's a story about believing in yourself. It is also a tale about the importance of remembering our past, and handing that memory down to future generations (and that is my primary role in Blogger). It’s all of these things wrapped up in a tremendously enjoyable package.

FGT is the kind of movie that despite how many times you have watched it, you always spot something new in it. What’s more is that the movie is so damned believable. Every time I watch this movie, I cry. But, uh I won’t tell you exactly which scene causes the water works (for me). I mean, it is kinda personal. However, I will say that the scene is so well-done, you can’t help but burst into tears and reach for the Kleenex. The whole movie is this way. Anyone watching it can totally relate to at least one or more of the characters and when they laugh, you laugh; when they cry, you cry. The acting and direction is just that incredible.

I recently purchased the Anniversary Extended Version of FGT. In this particular version of the movie, deleted scenes were placed back into the movie. I had viewed some of these scenes previously during a specially televised version of the film, and wondered why they had been cut in the first place.... So, having the movie in what I perceived as the “whole” version was very important to me.

Hats off as well to the masterful acting by each and every one of the cast members involved in this project!!! The casting of this film included some truly talented individuals; especially Mary Stuart Masterson.... Whether she is a member of an ensemble cast or starring in a lead role (about previous movies I have seen her in), Masterson always displays talent and poise, no matter how challenging the role. I’ve seen her in movies that bombed at the box office, and have never been able to say one adverse word about her acting abilities. Masterson is a pro, and I loved her as Idgie Threadgoode. In fact, she's my favorite character in FGT.

In addition to the movie, the Anniversary Edition of FGT included a few extras, THE MOST notable being a documentary about the making of the movie. "In Moments of Discovery: The Making of FGT", we learn about the dedication of everyone involved in making this movie. I had always admired the ability of Mary Stuart Masterson & Mary Louise Parker, and their ability to portray the close bond of Friendship felt between the characters that they portrayed. In watching THIS documentary (a detail that caught my attention the most), I learned that the two had become fast friends on the set, and that they really weren’t acting when it came to the Friendship aspect of their character’s relationship. So, it's no wonder they had such chemistry! When they discussed the food fight scene, it was with fondness and genuine laughter. Much of the scene was mapped out, but a great deal of it was unscripted (like they wanted to improvise at times), and you could tell that the actresses had terrific fun in its creation!

"Moments of Discovery" also revealed (raises eyebrows) the difficulty of transforming a novel into a script, and still keeping the basic integrity of the novel. What they didn't realize themselves, is that they accidentally created "something else" entirely. Ahhh, if only they knew!!! (Chuckles) It would've been "A NEW" (and another) important Moment of Discovery for them indeed....

Anyway, watching FGT is a must for any serious movie fan (especially targeted to a certain kind of audience that 'gets an emotional rise out of watching two women get emotionally close'). Hear, hear!! It has everything – important messages delivered and wrapped in an incredibly enjoyable story (truly two stories in one), a fabulous soundtrack, fantastic acting, incredible scenery, attention to detail, and much more. Fried Green Tomatoes is er.... definitely a movie worth watching again and again and again and....

You know what, forget it. I've decided instead to tell you all about my (many) favorite scenes, and show you guys a virtual photo gallery of FGT. Just to let you know, my TOP EIGHT favorite scenes are:

1.) Idgie goes into the buzzing hive of a thousand bees just to get a little bit of honey for Ruth. That was a classic romantic friendship scene. I loved Ruth's loooooong look of total awe as Idgie 'charmed' these bees. She was standing in a frozen wide-eyed spellbound state. I can very easily imagine Ruth telling herself, "Wow, that is soooooo dangerous.... I can't believe another woman would do something like this for me. I'm so taken aback." That's when I knew Ruth was in love with Idgie. I also liked the way Idgie looked at Ruth as she was walking back towards her (with the honey already inside the lid).

2.) The special cheek kiss by the lake at night (before Ruth dipped into the water). I saw Idgie's reaction. That's when I knew she was in love with Ruth. You see, Idgie planned a surprise birthday party for her. So thoughtful... When Ruth first came in the room and everyone yelled surprise, I loved it when she slapped her friend, and said "IDGIE THREADGOODE!" like she couldn't believe it. After all, it was the best birthday party she ever had (in her life). They played baseball, got a little drunk, and playfully splashed each other at the lake.

3.) I totally loved the devastation Idgie seems to feel when finding out Ruth is getting married. Girls are usually happy when a friend is getting married. Idgie seems heartbroken, and Ruth acts like she is fulfilling a duty. I’ve NEVER KNOWN someone to not go to a friend’s wedding, but watch from a distance (with a lovelorn look in the eyes) as her friend starts her new life... HOWEVER, I have known someone IN LOVE to do just that. In fact, this is very typical and normal behavior within the realm of romantic friendships.

4.) When Ruth wanted Idgie to come and get her (so she can get away). I suppose when Ruth's mother died, she used that narrow window of opportunity (the perfect excuse) to send Idgie a hidden message within an obituary letter. It was from the bible; from the Book of Ruth. She neatly underlined a specific verse for Idgie to see, "And Ruth said, whither thou goest, I will go; where thou lodgest, I will lodge; thy people shall be my people." Then a look of mutual understanding befell Idgie and Mama Threadgoode. Because they both knew Ruth didn't just want to get away; she also wanted to "marry" Idgie and spend the rest of her life with her. And as we all know, Ruth & Naomi (from the bible) shared what was considered a "romantic friendship." In fact, they even wanted to be buried together.

5.) Celebrating the birth of baby Buddy Jr. That was a beautiful moment! By then, they were already living together in a Boston marriage. Idgie's Friend Ruth had already given birth to a boy (named after Idgie's brother). I loved how Idgie got all hyper and excited, and burst through the door exclaiming "Whoo! Shit! It's a boy!" to the large company downstairs (they cheered along with her of course). Even the town priest blessed the event of Ruth & Idgie's child. It is great to see them finally become a trio!! Idgie's parents were also really thrilled. In fact, Papa Threadgoode went out and borrowed money so Ruth & Idgie could start a cafe.

6.) Entire playful, affectionate and cute food fight scene between the silly gals. For a split-second there, I swear Idgie was gonna kiss Ruth again!! It all started with Idgie saying, "Here, try this." Ruth at first lied, and said it was okay. Idgie insisted she tell her 100% the truth. "They're terrible," Ruth finally admitted. Idgie then said, "Oh, well, don't be shy. Tell me how you feel." And Ruth certainly told Idgie just how she felt! Therefore, it's no wonder at the peak of the food fight, we see a hint of jealousy flash across Grady's face.

7.) Hearing the memorable line, "I'm as settled as I ever hope to be." You see, late at night in the cafe, Ruth tells Idgie that maybe she should leave so that Idgie could settle down (in the traditional sense). Idgie responds with "I'm as settled as I ever hope to be." Ruth clearly was implying that she felt she was a burden to Idgie, and if she left maybe Idgie would find someone else who didn't have the baggage and drama (Ku Klux Klan trouble, the unfolding murder case, baby daddy issues). Idgie made it clear that she wasn't going anywhere; she was sticking it out with her ladylove for the long haul. Idgie then got up, walked over to Ruth, and gently caressed her soft hair.

8.) A fresh note (every time) at the grave that says, "I'll always love you, the Bee Charmer." There is a fresh jar of honey sitting right next to the intimate note on the tombstone too. That was soooooo very sweet and romantic. I sort of cried. It is nice to know that Idgie is still alive somewhere (after so many years had passed). In fact, legend has it that Idgie is still out and about, charmin' bees and selling honey. Sometimes people think they catch a glimpse of her.

There is one aspect of FGT that I'd like to clear up. It was alluded (for a split-second) in the movie that both Ninny Threadgoode & Idgie Threadgoode were the same person. Of course, if we think with our 'emotional side', they certainly are. However, if we use our 'logical side' of the brain, it is plain clear they aren't.

Let's rewind to the beginning of the movie. Ninny first says she had a huge crush on Buddy. That wouldn't fit if Ninny was Idgie. Being in love with your own brother? Ewwww. Soon afterwards while still narrating, Ninny also says she was ADOPTED (not a part of) the Threadgoode family. In fact, Ninny VERY CLEARLY stated that she married Idgie's brother Cleo (to her listener Evelyn Couch). Think hard... Who is the lady that screams, "SHE'S GOING TO RUIN MY WEDDING!" in the beginning of the movie?? Is this Ninny? **hint, hint** And exactly who is she marrying? One of Buddy's brothers?? If "I"MOGENE LOUISE THREA"DG"OOD"E" can be reduced to just Idgie (as a nickname), then surely "C"har"le"s "O"sgood can also be Cleo for short. You all seem to have forgotten that... Yes, Ninny IS Leona, and has been married to Cleo (Charles Osgood Threadgoode) FOR MORE THAN 40 YEARS. They even had a mentally retarded son, Albert (whose mind never developed pass the age of 5). Ninny had him with her until he was 30. Sooooo, where does that fit into the Ninny/Idgie equation? Things just aren't adding up.

In fact, Ninny (who is Leona) is actually the sister-in-law of both Idgie and Buddy. I mean, Buddy wasn't Idgie's ONLY BROTHER; he was Idgie's favorite brother. As quoted from the movie, "He was her BEST and MOST charming brother in the world." This clearly implies Idgie had other older brothers, and one of them was Cleo. Remember this too, the Threadgoode family was very large. It would be ridiculous to say Idgie and Buddy were THE ONLY children of Mama and Papa Threadgoode. Especially back then (in the early 1900's), it was very common to have six, seven or even eight brothers and sisters. This is just another important detail you all seem to have forgotten... Again yes, in the movie Ninny was actually Idgie's sister-in-law. That's how come Ninny knew so much about Idgie. They even had something special in common. Both of their children had significant disabilities (Ninny's son was retarded, and Idgie's adopted son Buddy Jr. lost his arm). It is no wonder then, they also share the same personal quote, "There is a separate God for children."

There's also no moment where Ninny acts ANYTHING like Idgie (earlier in the movie). Not once. I'll give you an important example. In the hospital Evelyn Couch once exclaimed to Ninny, "Well, I got mad and it felt terrific. I felt like I could beat the shit outta all those punks! Excuse my language. Just beat 'em to a pulp! Beat 'em 'til they begged for mercy. Towanda, The Avenger! After I wipe out all the punks of this world, I'll take on the wife beaters, like Frank Bennett, and machine gun their genitals. Towanda will go on the rampage! I'll put tiny bombs in Penthouse and Playboy so they'll explode when you open 'em. I'll ban all fashion models who weigh less than 130 pounds. I'll give half the military budget to people over 65... and declare wrinkles sexually desirable. Towanda, Righter of Wrongs, Queen Beyond Compare!" REMEMBER, Idgie was always wild, raised her voice a lot, known to be an ardent feminist, and a bit rough (and never scared of men). If Ninny & Idgie were the same person, Ninny would've easily responded to Evelyn with, "Yeah, baby!! Whoo-hoo! Now, that's what I'm talkin' about! I'm with you!!" But, Ninny acted all meek and sweet, even concerned (like she couldn't help her on this one) and said, "How many of them hormones you takin', honey?" This would not have been Idgie's reaction at all....

What's more, there is nothing in the movie that remains to make any sane, observant person think Ninny is Idgie, except that she happens to be in the cemetery where there's some honey at Ruth's grave. When would frail old grieving Ninny have gotten this honey, and where did she get the jar? HER HOUSE IS EVEN GONE.

Anyway, I like the fact that they allude to Ninny & Idgie being the same person -- it leaves a puzzle for us to figure out and talk about.... Is she or isn't she? Of course, in this case, the answer is NO. Overall, I think this whole thing was done just to add an element of drama, and to make us question the Ninny/Idgie conundrum.

There is one last thing I'd like to address. This is the only sole issue that truly 'bothered' and 'nagged' me. In fact, it sticked out in my mind long after the movie was over. Why, for the life of me, is this movie called, "Fried Green Tomatoes?" It doesn't make any sense at all. In fact, labeling the film FGT strongly implies that the 'main idea' or 'central theme' of the tale is about Idgie & Ruth opening the Whistle Stop Cafe, working together there, and making fried green tomatoes (laughs). This is completely false. I don't even want to know who came up with this. Because whoever it was, that person is not much different from Albert.

The 'MAIN IDEA' or 'CENTRAL THEME' of this epic tale focuses on Idgie, her unique Friendship with Ruth, and their joys, trials & tribulations of the Deep South. In my opinion, this movie should've been titled instead, "The Bee Charmer From Alabama."

In conclusion, Fried Green Tomatoes is truly a reflection of the rawest form of humanity, before Hollywood sugarcoats it with shimmering lip gloss or a makeup crew adds fake blood. It is a story about friends, living in the past and present, and coming together anytime someone needs help. It is a story about spiritual nourishment, not just about actual food. Most important of all, IT IS a story about Idgie & Ruth that deserves TO BE TOLD. Oh, yes... It is true, even if its roots drink from a river of fiction.

There is no doubt, Fried Green Tomatoes is one of the best movies ever made. Anyone learning about film, acting, story or writing should be required to study this piece. The film has humor, drama, romance (without sex), mystery, and a sense of magic that is both haunting and comforting at the same time. FGT also has sentimental value for me. I watch it once in a while when I need an emotional boost. This is a film I know I’ll watch over and over (in the future), and it has all the essentials that make it an intense picture with deep characters and historical relevance.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PHOTO GALLERY

Idgie & Ruth

2009-09-22T17:46:00.000-07:00

Here's the story behind the story and (THE REAL REASON) why the general audience were so confused about the movie; thus creating among themselves the ol' "were they or weren't they???" heated debates between Idgie & Ruth that still continues up to this day. Here are the various mixed reactions of several reviewers online (I will copy & paste their opinions/interpretations on here). Interesting enough, five individuals had the correct, and most accurate answer without knowing about the concept of Romantic Friendship. They can be found under the comments of (#11) through (#15).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Comment #1) "It was a rated PG movie made for entertainment, and VERY WELL done, although it does leave us scratching our heads...."

(Comment #2) "I'm a bit confused, were Ruth & Idgie lovers or not?"

(Comment #3) "Is it my imagination or was there 'something more' going on between these two female protagonists?"

(Comment #4) "I don't know whether they were lovers or not, but it was a special friendship nevertheless."

(Comment #5) "I thought they were just really good friends."

(Comment #6) "What?! I thought Idgie and Ruth were just friends."

(Comment #7) "I love this movie!! I'm soooooo sad Ruth died in the end. I really wanted them to be best friends forever."

(Comment #8) "Idgie and Ruth were pretty tight. I've never seen such a strong platonic bond between two women."

(Comment #9) "Idgie and Ruth weren't lesbians at all. Where was the sex? The two women didn't even make out!! This is not lesbianism; just pure innocent friendship."

(Comment #10) "Oh please, they are merely close friends!! You guys analyze stuff wayyyyy too closely."

(Comment #11) "I believe they were friends, and became so close that no man could fill the shoes of the other one.... So, that's how I took it."

(Comment #12) "My interpretation is that Ruth & Idgie's relationship was a recipe blended with a deeply rich, compassionate, human, real and intimate love. Period."

(Comment #13) "In my humble opinion, I truly believe that two people don't have to be making love to one another to aspire to this unusually deep, intimate friendship."

(Comment #14) ".... And about the relationship between Idgie and Ruth (in the movie), I think that you could interpret the relationship in any way you want. I can definitely feel the homosexual vibes some might pick up on. However, I do not feel that Idgie and Ruth were lovers. I believe that two women can love each other, and be in love without being lesbians. To me, for there to be a homosexual relationship, they would have to 'get physical' (sexually) which was never spoken of nor alluded to in the movie; in my opinion."

(Comment #15) "I got this DVD as a Christmas present, and it was great. I also picked up that while not lesbian lovers, Idgie and Ruth were a couple as much as any couple ever, due to their love for each other, and their devotion, and their commitment - and so, as far as I am concerned, they win over any physical commitment that anyone else can lay a claim to."

(Comment #16) "Ruth and Idgie were lovers. Deal."

(Comment #17) "Oh, I thought Idgie was a lesbian and Ruth was bisexual."

(Comment #18) "I don't intend to be confrontational, but there was never a doubt in my mind that Ruth and Idgie were lovers."

(Comment #19) "This movie broke barriers and was a breakthrough in LGBT cinema."

(Comment #20) "Wait a minute.... If they were lesbians, HOW COME their conservative and religious families, friends and relatives (back then homosexuality was punishable by death) were so accepting of their relationship?? It doesn't make sense."

(Comment #21) "They were closeted-lesbians!! Duh!"

(Comment #22) "That's virtually impossible. They can't fool everyone. The small town they lived in was wayyyyy toooo closed-knit!! It is NOTHING LIKE today's society. Everybody (back then) knew everything about everybody else (even little minor details). There was no privacy whatsoever. Ruth and Idgie didn't even live by themselves. There was a constant stream of company coming in and out of their huge home every single day. No knocking on doors at all. The black servant also lived with them (plus the kid too), and probably a few more folks. After all, it was a big family. If there was EVEN A HINT of something going on, the gossip would've spread like wildfire all over town in a split-second!!!"

(Comment #23) "Oh come on, it is A LESBIAN film, plain and simple. Everyone can see that. You want close platonic relationships between friends?? Watch Steel Magnolias."

(Comment #24) "They are definitely lesbians. Idgie NEVER ACCEPTS the advances of any male suitors. She established EARLY ON as being unhappy in girlish clothes. Look, Idgie played baseball too!!! What does that imply, huh?? What's more, both suffered from big traumas relating to men. Idgie's brother got killed. Ruth was abused by her husband so she decided to 'switch teams.' Also, best friends do not caress each other!"

(Comment #25) "The implication is that Ruth and Idgie are IN LOVE, in the romantic sense. If you can't see this in the way they look at each other, the way they talk to each other, the way they touch each other; etc then you are in SERIOUS DENIAL of the very fact they're lesbians."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Believe it or not, VERY FEW folks out there (only the avid book readers) know that Fried Green Tomatoes was originally an actual lesbian novel. It wasn't until YEARS LATER they decided to create an entire movie based on it. In fact, the filmmakers drew criticism from (a very small percentage of) reviewers for removing THE WHOLE homosexual aspect of the book's plot. I completely understand that the majority of people would have turned their backs on a film (if it was deemed sexual), and the producers knew about this possibility beforehand (unwanted negative outcome). So the filmmakers did what they had to do to remain true to the story without "stepping on too many toes." Besides, lesbianism was still a "little taboo" back in the 1990's, and therefore filmmakers wanted to avoid controversy. Yet at the same time, they wanted the film to be a 100% success. They had to come up with some sort of compromise. So then, what did they do?? They wanted ONLY TO PORTRAY two women deeply in love, period. They simply wanted to portray an intense romance between two beautiful ladies (pleasing the lesbian audience), yet simultaneously do the whole thing in the absence of sex, lust & erotica (thus pleasing the straight audience). **Drum Rolls** What then came out as a result in this motion picture?? Romantic Friendship!!!

In other words, unbeknownst to the executive producers & their hard-working crew who created this spectacular film (and without the general audience realizing it), they had in reality, ACCIDENTALLY PRODUCED a romantic friendship AND Boston marriage version of Fried Green Tomatoes. And let me tell you, it was a beautiful and unforgettable outcome!!! A magnificent work of art, indeed! If you stop to really think about it, this popular movie actually 'broke barriers' and was 'a breakthrough' in Romantic Friendship cinema! In fact, this movie was a perfect precursor to a particular cult classic television show we all know and love.

Here's my favorite wallpaper. The quote therein rings so true for me. I mean.... if you loved another (on a profound level) and you were very (genuinely) loved in return, then who cares about the whole traditional 'marriage/sex idea?' It doesn't really matter. In fact, you definitely "haven't missed a thing" if you had experienced real 'LOVE' in life. Please, to all of my readers out there, think about this deeply.

Fried Green Tomatoes

2009-09-22T17:40:00.000-07:00

Flashback to Feisty Females in Film

Note: If you cannot access this video, copy this address & paste it on your web browser toolbar above (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGks5k4mfyQ) and then click "Go."

FYI: This epic motion picture film is about a Friendship that spans over two decades. For your information, Idgie and Ruth are like approximately 10yrs apart in age. In the beginning of the movie, Idgie was around 10yrs old, and has known Ruth (at that time Ruth was around 20yrs of age) for some time. However, as the years had progressed, their age differences didn't matter anymore; Ruth was already in her early 30's as Idgie approached her early 20's halfway in the movie. Anyway, they had started to develop a natural romantic attraction towards each other and formed a deep attachment, and then forged an emotionally-close tender Friendship as time passed.

Plot & Synopsis: A woman (Evelyn) learns the value of Friendship as she hears the story of two women going through the trials and tribulations of the Deep South back in the 1930's, and how their Friendship shaped their lives in this warm comedy-drama. Every time I watch this movie, I feel genuinely good, sentimental and gushy. In the present-day (1980's) Evelyn Couch (Kathy Bates) is an emotionally repressed housewife with a habit of drowning her sorrows in candy bars. Her husband Ed (Gailard Sartain) barely acknowledges her existence, and while he visits his aunt at a nursing home every week, Evelyn is not permitted to come into the room because the old women doesn't like her. One week, while waiting out Ed's visit, Evelyn meets Ninny Threadgoode (Jessica Tandy), a frail but feisty old woman who lives at the same nursing home and loves to tell stories. Over the span of several weeks, she spins a whopper about one of her relatives, Idgie Threadgoode (Mary Stuart Masterson). Back in the Depression-Era, Idgie was a sweet but fiercely independent woman with her own way of doing things. In fact, she absolutely refuses to settle down (in the traditional sense) or play by 1930s social rules. Anyhoo, Idgie also ran the town diner in Whistle Stop, Alabama. Idgie was very close to her brother Buddy (Chris O'Donnell), and when he died, she wouldn't talk to anyone except Buddy's girl, Ruth Jamison (Mary-Louise Parker). After all, they both witnessed a terrible train accident, and were both tightly bonded by the tragedy in the 1920's. A decade later or so, Idgie gave Ruth a job at the cafe after Ruth left her abusive husband, Frank Bennett (Nick Searcy). They lived together, and even raised a child whom they named Buddy Jr. Between Idgie's habit of standing up for herself, standing up to Frank, and serving food to Black people out the back of the diner; Idgie raised the ire of the less tolerant citizens of Whistle Stop. And when Frank mysteriously disappeared, many locals suspected that Idgie, Ruth, and their friends may have been responsible. Evelyn finds herself looking forward to her weekly visits with Ninny, and is inspired by her story to take a new pride in herself and really assert her independence from Ed. Fried Green Tomatoes (the film) was based on the novel "Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe" by actress-turned-author Fannie Flagg, who makes a cameo appearance as the leader of a self-help group.

The Two Friends: Ruth Jamison & Idgie Threadgoode
The Narrator And Keeper Of Their Memories: Ninny
The Intense And Serious Listener: Evelyn Couch

Year We Got To Know Them: 1991

Best Known For: Giving us the feminist rally-cry “Towanda!!”, encouraging women to take control of their lives, showing a story of two women in love (back in the good ol' days), and giving women a little bit of hope and a special Friendship in the truly stellar Fried Green Tomatoes

Why They Deserve A Second Look: The audience and media were divided on their own opinions/interpretations regarding the nature of Idgie & Ruth's unique relationship. Some thought Idgie & Ruth were 'just friends' while others went to the opposite extreme proclaiming them to be 'lovers'. Upon closer examination, however, we can plainly see the answer is (surprisingly) NEITHER OF THE ABOVE. That is why THEY DESERVE a second (and very, very, loooooong) look....

Sure, all we see is an innocent (but special) kiss...

... and according to the director, the food fight scene is supposed to represent, well, "metaphorical lovemaking."

... it still portrays a unique and loving Friendship between the two women. And with the friendship between Ninny & Evelyn (present day) that lifts them both up, this film is filled with outstanding feisty feminist females. I could definitely say Fried Green Tomatoes truly did help shape me into a feminist before I even knew what the word meant!!!

Seriously, you haven’t seen it?? Then throw it in the Netflix queue, call up your girlfriends, and have a great slumber party to remind yourself just how important Friendship is.

Olive Chancellor & Verana Tarrant

2009-09-22T17:37:00.001-07:00

~~Photo Gallery~~

The Bostonians (1984) DVD & Novel

2009-09-22T14:55:00.001-07:00

Director James Ivory brings Henry James wonderful classic novel, the bostonians, to the screen in this evocative, historical adaptation filled with exciting, exacting performances. The story centers on the fight between an ardent feminist and a southern gentleman for a charismatic faith healer's daughter. Basil Ransom (Christopher Reeve), a conservative lawyer, woos the youthful, charming, and articulate Verena Tarrant (Madeleine Potter in her first film role), but he objects to her involvement in the suffragist movement and to Olive Chancellor (Vanessa Redgrave), Verena's feminist mentor. The relationship between Redgrave, Reeve and Potter is mesmerizing to watch, and Reeve, better known for his role in the SUPERMAN series, is handsomely dynamic. Jessica Tandy, Linda Hunt, and Nancy Marchand also costar in this strong ensemble film shot in stunning New England locations.

Set in 1875, this film focuses on the post-Civil War intellectual community of Boston and Cambridge, bringing to life the suffragist movement, which passionately involved many of its women. Verena Tarrant (Madeleine Potter) is a charming young woman who draws large, paying crowds to hear her speak about "the just revolution," which would free women from their second class status. Though Verena describes herself as "only a girl, a simple American girl," her strength as a speaker quickly brings her to the attention of Olive Chancellor (Vanessa Redgrave), an older woman whose dedication to the movement, and eventually to Verena, is single-minded and all-consuming.

When Verena moves in with the overly protective Olive, Olive wants her to promise that she will never marry, but the inevitable happens. Basil Ransom (Christopher Reeve), Olive's cousin, arrives from the south, and is immediately smitten by Verena. Soon Verena must face the conflicts between her loyalties toward Olive, and the movement.

The script by Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, based on the novel by Henry James, brings the passionate commitment of the suffragists to life. And the direction by James Ivory shows the pervasive effects of the movement on both men and women, from Harvard students to elderly matriarchs, and pioneering female doctors. The costumes, which were nominated for an academy award, and the settings in Boston's Back Bay drawing rooms and shore-side summer homes give a liveliness and reality to the period. Supporting roles (other actresses from the film) add power and dramatic intrigue to the emotional tug-of-war for the soul of Verena.

Tagline: A BEAUTIFUL FILM . . . An intimate and exquisite probe of the feminist heart!

A Few Fun Trivia Facts To Know:

1.) The climatic scene at the "Boston Music Hall" was actually filmed at the Troy Savings Bank Music Hall in Troy, New York, finished in 1875. The Boston Music Hall was pulled down in the 1950s. But the film required a civic hall with a pipe organ in it for plot reasons. While we see the 1882 Odell organ in the Troy hall, the organ itself didn't work very well in 1983, so the music was actually recorded on the organ at Mechanics Hall, Worcester, Massachusetts.

2.) During filming, actress Madeleine Potter noticed that one of her costumes had the name "Nastassja Kinski" sewn into it. As it turned out, the dress had originally been made to be used in the movie Tess (1979).

3.) Glenn Close agreed to play Olive Chancellor, but dropped out to film The Natural (1984).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I had mixed feelings when I saw THAT TRIVIA fact. But, I couldn't believe my own eyes... This is something I will always remember. I mean, I just knew Glenn Close (the actress) would've been soooooo awesome playing the character of Olive Chancellor too!!! Yet, at the same time, perhaps not since I would be very distracted with her on screen. Why? Because I've seen, heard (and known) Glenn Close IN A PLETHORA of movies/films..... and I will not bother to list em' all. I mean, just having a superhero in it was distracting enough. But, an internal (and not-so subtle) battle between 'Clark Kent' and 'Cruella de Vil' for the soul of Verena Tarrant? That would've been way 'too much.' And I meant that; like in the silly sense. If they had added Glenn Close in it, then they better as well have Carrie Fisher as the gifted young orator instead!!!

Yep, a showdown between 'The Man Of Steel' vs. 'Disney's Ultimate Supervillain' for the hand of 'Princess Leia' (from Star Wars) would've been more interesting to watch! LOL

If You Could Come

2009-09-22T14:45:00.000-07:00

"IF YOU COULD COME" Poem

'My love, my love, if you could come once more
From your high place,
I would not question you for heavenly lore,
But, silent, take the comfort of your face.

I would not ask you if those golden spheres
In love rejoice,

If only our stained star hath sin and tears,
But fill my famished hearing with your voice.

One touch of you were worth a thousand creeds.
My wound is numb
Through toil-pressed, but all night long it bleeds
In aching dreams, and still you cannot come.'

Yellow Clover

2009-09-22T14:35:00.000-07:00

As stated in the previous entry, in 1922, Bates published a limited volume of poetry entitled, "Yellow Clover" & "If You Could Come" where she wrote of their relationship. I thought they were very beautiful, and decided to display the two pieces of work on here.

Note: Needless to say, for most of its life in Old English (especially back in the 1800's and early 1900's), the term "gay" (as mentioned in this wonderful poem) is of course, commonly used in the meaning of "cheerful", "bright", "joyful", and "merry" in regards to speech and literature.

"YELLOW CLOVER" Poem

'Must I, who walk alone,
Come on it still,
This Puck of plants
The wise would do away with,
The sunshine slants
To play with,

Our wee, gold-dusty flower, the yellow clover,
Which once in parting for a time
That then seemed long,
Ere time for you was over,
We sealed our own?

Do you remember yet,
O Soul beyond the stars,
Beyond the uttermost dim bars
Of space,

Dear Soul who found the earth sweet,
Remember by love's grace,
In dreamy hushes of heavenly song,
How suddenly we halted in our climb,
Lingering, reluctant, up that farthest hill,
Stooped for the blossoms closest to our feet,
And gave them as a token

Each to each,
In lieu of speech,
In lieu of words too grievous to be spoken,
Those little, gypsy, wondering blossoms wet
With a strange dew of tears?

So it began,
This vagabond, unvalued yellow clover,
To be our tenderest language. All the years
It lent a new zest to the summer hours,
As each of us went scheming to surprise
The other with our homely, laureate flowers,
Sonnets and odes,
Fringing our daily roads.

Can amaranth and asphodel
Bring merrier laughter to your eyes?

Oh, if the Blest, in their serene abodes,
Keep any wistful consciousness of earth,
Not grandeurs, but the childish ways of love,
Simplicities of mirth,
Must follow them above
With touches of vague homesickness that pass
Like shadows of swift birds across the grass.
How oft, beneath some foreign arch of sky,

The rover,
You or I,
For life oft sundered look from look,
And voice from voice, the transient dearth
Schooling my soul to brook
This distance that no messages may span,
Would chance
Upon our wilding by a lonely well,
Or drowsy watermill,
Or swaying to the chime of convent bell,
Or where the nightingales of old romance
With tragical contraltos fill
Dim solitudes of infinite desire;

And once I joyed to meet
Our peasant gadabout
A trespasser on trim, seigniorial seat,
Twinkling a sauce eye
As potentates paced by.

Our golden cord! our soft, pursuing flame
From Friendship's altar fire!
How proudly we would pluck and tame
The dimpling clusters, mutinously gay!

How swiftly they were sent
Far, far away
On journeys wide
By sea and continent,
Green miles and blue leagues over,
From each of us to each,
That so our hearts might reach
And touch within the yellow clover,
Love's letter to be glad about
Like sunshine when it came!

My sorrow asks no healing; it is love;
Let love then make me brave
To bear the keen hurts of
This careless summertide,
Ay, of our own poor flower,
Changed with our fatal hour,
For all its sunshine vanished when you died.
Only white cover blossoms on your grave.'

Prominent Women In Boston Marriages II

2009-09-22T14:27:00.000-07:00

Katharine Lee Bates & Katharine Coman

~~About Bates (1859-1929)~~
Katharine Lee Bates was an ardent feminist and the author of the song "America the Beautiful." Her father, a Congregational minister, died when Katharine was less than a month old. Her brothers had to go to work to help support the family, but Katharine was given an education. She received her B.A. from Wellesley College in 1880, and her teaching career was the central interest of her adult life. She believed that through literature, human values could be revealed and developed. Also, as an adult she was deeply religious, but could not find a church in whose faith she could be certain. Later on, Bates returned to join the faculty at the college. While on staff she met Katharine Coman, and began a committed exclusive partnership that lasted for 25 years. Bates and Coman's relationship is best described as a romantic friendship, and it was intensely loving. In fact, Bates referred to Coman as her "Joy of Life" and wrote many poems about their love. Both women had successful careers at Wellesley college. Bates became chair of the English department, while Coman became chair of the Economics Department and Dean of the college. They kept contact with other educated women who lived in couples as they did, but they did not assume roles as lesbian activists. In 1912, Coman was diagnosed with cancer, and Bates nursed her until Coman died in 1915. In 1922, Bates published a limited volume of poetry entitled, "Yellow Clover," where she wrote of their relationship. Bates remained at Wellesley until she retired in 1925. She died four years later, at the age of 70. Only a few years before her death, she wrote to a friend, "So much of me died with Katharine Coman that I'm sometimes not quite sure whether I'm alive or not."

Prominent Women In Boston Marriages I

2009-09-22T14:17:00.000-07:00

Sarah Orne Jewett & Annie Fields

~~About Jewett (1849-1909)~~
Named for her paternal grandfather and grandmother, Theodora Sarah Orne Jewett was the second of three girls born to Theodore Herman and Caroline Frances Perry Jewett in the New England village of South Berwick, Maine. Jewett is a major figure in the literature of female romantic friendship. Fascinated throughout her career with relationships among women, Jewett grounded her personal life in close friendships with women, the most important of which was her long relationship with Annie Fields (her "wife"), a woman prominent and powerful in her own right in the Boston literary and publishing world. The two women's commitment to each other began in the early 1880s, shortly after the death of Fields's husband, the publisher James Fields, and became the strongest bond in the author's adult life. Fields and Jewett traveled widely in Europe and the eastern United States and lived a large part of every year together, dividing their time between Boston and the New England shore. During all this time, the two women found Friendship, humor, and also "literary encouragement" in one another's company. Jewett has never married. Finally, on September 3, 1902, Jewett was injured in a carriage accident that all but ended her writing career. She died three months after being paralyzed by a stroke in 1909. The Jewett family home in South Berwick, built in the late eighteenth century, is preserved as a National Historic Landmark.

Boston Marriage

2009-09-22T14:12:00.000-07:00

What if your romantic friendship went on to a higher level? What if you shared a home and life with your best Friend? What do you call that? Fortunately, there is a name for your unique living arrangement, and it's called...

~~Boston Marriage~~

It was a term used to describe nineteenth-century romantic friendships that included long-term cohabitation. These were emotionally intense and physically tender Friendships between women who chose to live with each other instead of marrying. In modern times, there is much debate about whether Boston marriages were “really” closeted lesbian relationships. Certainly some were— but there is much evidence that a large percentage of them were not. Consider that romantic friendships and Boston marriages were socially acceptable in a time when homosexuality was considered a mortal sin; consider that similar nonsexual relationships have been documented in cultures from every continent and many different time periods.

Boston marriages were not considered to be perverted or “homosexual” in their time, because they were assumed to be nonsexual. (Victorians trusted women to maintain a nonsexual long-term relationship, because “proper” women were thought to have almost no sex drive.)

Boston marriage was an essentially feminist relationship— the women chose each other as long-term housemates not only because of the depth of their Friendship, but also because marrying a man at the time would lead to a lifetime of servitude. Feminist women wanted to change marriage— but in the meantime, they did not want to partake of the institution as it existed. Boston marriage gave feminist women a home life as they pursued social and legal reform efforts—and thus, Boston marriage was eventually seen as a threat to patriarchy. Psychologists began describing romantic friendship and Boston marriage as “perverted” around the same time as feminists were achieving their most dramatic victories, such as suffrage.

The most common modern term for a nonsexual “marriage” between two women is “lesbian bed death”—a term that, unlike “Boston marriage,” presumes that the lack of sex is a failure of some kind. Some women have argued for a return to the original term, (claiming correctly in my view), that the expectation that all “serious love relationships” should be sexual is a patriarchal notion.

Friendship Commitment Ceremony

2009-09-22T14:07:00.000-07:00

Friendship Commitment Ceremony – A generic term for the commencement ritual of a committed Friendship, as practiced throughout the world. Such ceremonies often resemble weddings in that two people are joined together by a religious and spiritual ritual with symbolic elements. In this text, a Friendship Commitment Ceremony is distinguished from a wedding by the fact that it cements a non-sexual, non-blood relationship. (Glossary Of World Friendship Terminology Website)

[Notice the yellow flowers represent Friendship]

You know how young girls sometimes say, "I wish I could marry my best friend!" They are saying it with heartfelt sincerity, coming from the bottom of their hearts & souls.... Suddenly, their unique dreams are shattered into a thousand pieces when adults who hear this laugh it off, say there is no such thing and/or tell them to stop this silly nonsense (only boyfriends/girlfriends get married). Sadly, those girls were right. There is such a thing as literally marrying your Friend. And you can! Although Friendship Commitment Ceremonies are nearly obsolete, it is still practiced in few parts of the world today.

Why were these ceremonies so prevalent in the past and so rare now? I can think of two main reasons. The first is because in this sex-obsessed society of the 21st century, Friendship is seldom acknowledged as including the possibility of profound intimacy (what I'm alluding to is of course, romantic friendship). That's why people who read this might laugh and say, "This is so ridiculous! Why marry a best friend when you can have several best friends?" This is where they misunderstood. Actually, I'm talking about two completely different friendships.

For instance, today friendship is a particular relationship or activity of mutual and reciprocal goodwill, characterized by qualities of honesty, trust, respect, self-disclosure, and an average degree of caring and affection between people who seek to spend time together (first definition).

However, in the past there were casual/close friendships, as well as Friendships that were placed to such paramount importance, that even some people considered it more significant than sexual relationships (gay or straight). In fact, in ancient times Friendship was seen as the "happiest and most fully human of all loves; the crown of life and the school of virtue." What's more, did you know that the *dictionary definition* of Friendship in 1755 was “the highest form of intimacy?" This is the second definition of Friendship that few know about.

That is why I sometimes use "friendship" or "Friendship". There is a big difference between the two. When you're just friends, good friends or best friends; it is friendship with the letter "f" being lowercase because you are operating on the first definition of friendship. Now, if you have a powerful emotional bond and/or share a degree of physical closeness beyond that common in modern society (like romantic friendship, living together in a Boston marriage, willing to put each other "first" in your lives; etc) then you are no longer operating on the first definition of friendship (from today), but on the SECOND DEFINITION, (from 1755) "the highest form of intimacy." Therefore your friendship is capitalized, turning it into a beautiful thing called Friendship which is synonymous to romantic friendship.

The second reason for the decline is because of some hidden taboo about marrying your Friend. Yes, you see.... Some people are married to "Jesus" (nuns and priests), some are married to their "spouses" (husbands/wives), some are married to their "jobs" (workaholics), but very few are married (or willing to marry) their "Friend". Women are fearful deep down (it's so unrealistic) that on some level it just won't work out. They will delve into all those "what-if?" questions. Funny, isn't it? Because those very "what if" questions actually drive the two women away from closeness with each other. Yes, they would have to seriously re-think their ideas about commitment. But once they do, it can be a heavenly feeling.

And then the two Friends can finally have this beautiful and wonderful "Friendship Commitment Ceremony", inviting all their other friends, best friends, family members and relatives to witness this unique, rare and very special "wedding".

A Day At Disneyland

2009-09-22T14:04:00.000-07:00

“Being Friends is being a lot"
Annie Dennison, Ph.D. (Copyright 2006)

Many years ago, during my mouthy pre-teen phase, a friend and I went to Disneyland for the day with our moms.

I was so embarrassed.

Not because I was nearly a teenager, at Disneyland, still accompanied by parent-types. I was embarrassed because those two moms -- best of Friends who’d raised their children together in middle-class suburbia -- were starting to walk through Disneyland, holding hands with fingers intertwined.

Oh, the horror.

The fact that my mom was publicly holding hands with another mom meant that Everyone in The World -- visiting Disneyland that sunny day -- would be jumping to the wrong conclusion. Actually, being pretty ignorant at the time about what it meant for a person to be gay, straight, or anything in-between, I didn’t really understand what that “wrong conclusion” might be. But, somehow I’d decided that I didn’t feel comfortable with it.

So I did what any self-respecting, embarrassed, pre-teen girl would do.

I loudly hissed, “Mother!”

That one potent hissed word, communicated volumes to her: My inflated sense of self-consciousness. My little-girl, super-sized judgment. And an urgent plea for her to stop holding hands with another woman in public.

In my mom’s infinite wisdom, fortunately, she chose to ignore me. We talked later.

Fast forward several decades. Although I never successfully outgrew that mouthy pre-teen phase, I did outgrow my discomfort with public displays of affection between women friends, and other pairs of loving people. And I understand now how precious and rare it is to feel that close to someone who isn’t also a sexual partner.

In some cultures, and in some parts of the world, it’s more widely-accepted for people of the same sex to be affectionate with each other. They hold hands. They kiss… more than once. They walk arm-in-arm.

Not so true where I live, here in Orange County, California. Although, I have been noticing that more pre-teen and teen gal-pals in my community are walking to-and-from school, holding hands. Sometimes in groups of three or more.

It makes me wonder. If I were a pre-teen girl now, growing up in Southern California, would I be embarrassed if my mom held hands with another mom at Disneyland? Or, would I be doing the same with my friend? Would I even be willing to go to Disneyland with my mother?

Times have changed, but judging from the recent brouhaha over Oprah and Gayle’s famous Friendship, we’re still struggling to trust the concept of deep and platonic [romantic] bonds between women. Or, for that matter, deep and platonic [romantic] bonds between men.

This is how Oprah addressed the rumors about herself and Gayle in a recent interview:

“I understand why people think we're gay. There isn't a definition in our culture for this kind of bond between women. So I get why people have to label it -- how can you be this close without it being sexual? How else can you explain a level of intimacy where someone always loves you, always respects you, admires you?”

Honestly, when I first heard the rumors, I was perfectly willing to believe that Oprah might be gay. Not that the idea had occurred to me; but it also didn’t matter to me.

What does matter to me is that Oprah, after years of hearing the rumors, felt like she had to get more outspoken in denying them. Not that it's any of our business. But, of course, her celebrity amplifies everything... even Friendship.

Thank goodness, that day at Disneyland, my un-famous, wise mom didn't feel like she had to explain her special Friendship to anyone.

Miss Spitfire & Little Bronco

2009-09-22T14:02:00.000-07:00

TBA (yes.... can u guess who they actually are??)

Ladies of Llangollen: A Study In Romantic Friendship

2009-09-22T13:59:00.001-07:00

Perhaps the most famous of these romantic friendships was between Eleanor Butler and Sarah Ponsonby, nicknamed the Ladies of Llangollen. “Theirs was a love affair that triumphantly defied convention” -- Sunday Telegraph.

Lady Eleanor Butler (1739-1829) a beautiful, unconventional woman, was twenty–nine when she met Sarah Ponsonby (1755-1831), a sensitive, retiring girl of thirteen. The two upper-class Irishwomen developed an intensely close emotional Friendship, and ten years later in 1778, they eloped. After their dramatic escape across the Irish sea, they settled together in Plas Newydd, an idyllic cottage located at Llangollen Vale in Wales.

In 1782, only a couple of years after taking up house together, people were confessing themselves captivated by their romantic mode of life. And three years later, their fame had traveled so widely that the Queen was asking for plans of the cottage and garden. This was only the prelude to an adulation accorded to few celebrities in any era, and it was to last until their deaths and after.

Here's a poem a friend of theirs (Mrs. Grant) wrote of their love and lives, which they liked so much they transcribed copies of it to give their friends and visitors:

'In the Vale of Langollen a Cottage is seen
Well shelter'd from tempests by shades ever green
Where the daisy first opens its eye - to the day
And the hawthorn first flowers on the bosom of May.

There far from the haunts of ambition and pride
Contentment, and virtue, and Friendship abide,
And nature, complacent smiles sweet on the pair
Who have splendour forsaken to worship her there.

Bright patterns of wisdom affection and truth
Retired to the shade in the gay bloom of youth
Your sweet rural cottage and pastoral views
Are the charm of the Vale, and the theme of the Muse.

To the Shade for concealment in vain you retire,
We follow to wonder - to gaze - and admire.
Those graces which fancy and feeling refine,
Like the glow-worm thro' deepest obscurity shine

While ambition exults in her storm-beaten dome,
Like the tower on your Mountain that frowns o'er your home
With tranquil seclusion, and Friendship your lot
How blest, how secure, and how envied your cot!’

Eleanor and Sara shared everything….

Their bound books are gold-lettered, E.B. on the front, S.P. on the back; so with their china and with nearly every possession they have. Their letters are signed jointly, the initials of the Beloved followed by the full name of the writer of the letter. In speech they use always the collective 'We'. They call one another 'Beloved' always, as Dorothy and William Wordsworth do. 'Beloved', which had about the same weight then as 'Darling', and which even in Sara's account book was shortened to 'My B'.

Eleanor Butler seems to be the stronger character; people notice that it is she who appears to make the decisions; to do most of the talking; who is the active principle. Yet, when the library chimney catches fire and their precious cottage is likely to burn down, it is not Eleanor but Sarah who has the presence of mind to thrust her arm up the chimney, burning it as she does so, and to pull down Lady Dungannon's dull, voluminous letter, which has started the trouble. When a drunken man calls at the cottage and puts his foot in the kitchen door; it is not Eleanor but Sarah who goes down to send him away.

And they shared a bed too….

They cared for and loved each other, as shown in this letter Eleanor wrote in 1817 to her friend Mrs. Montagu:

‘I kept my bed all day with one of my dreadful headaches. My Sara, my tender, my sweet love lay beside me holding and supporting my head till one o'clock when I by much entreaty prevailed with her to rise and get her breakfast. She never left me for half a moment the entire day except at two o'clock when she perceived Mr. Whalley and little Richard coming down the field. She ran out to prevent his rapping at the door and to borrow the 1st Volume of the Tab de Suisse which she knew I was pining for... My beloved sat by my bedside reading it to me for nearly two hours - I wou'd not permit Sara to continue - lest it shou'd impair her precious health. Mrs. Tatters (our cat), uneasy that we did not come downstairs at the usual hour, scratched at our door for admittance, came on the bed to me and lay there till ten o'clock at night purring all the time - a day of tenderness and sensibility.’

To sum things up, this wonderful book depict a powerful and rare Friendship that lasted over fifty years. Elizabeth Mavor’s beautifully detailed biography, first published in 1971, gives us a fascinating glimpse into the life and times of two remarkable women in a Boston marriage.

It is the simple story of how these two women met, how the unique relationship between the two blossomed… and finally, how their generous, civilized and romantic way of living eventually became a legend! Their fame traveled widely: Lady Caroline Lamb and Josiah Wedgwood visited them, Wordsworth and Southey wrote poetry under their roof, and other celebrities of the day became cherished friends.

Eleanor and Sara may have been considered eccentrics, but were nonetheless praised in literature. Their story was considered "the epitome of virtuous romantic friendship", and inspired poetry by Anna Seward and Henry Longfellow. Enduring loyalty, devotion, and love were major themes in this book. It reminds us again and again, that women could form strong, affectionate, romantic and exclusive bonds with each other, and still lead innocent and chaste lives.

The Lady With The Lamp

2009-09-22T12:35:00.001-07:00

TBA

The Maid of Lorraine

2009-09-22T12:32:00.001-07:00

TBA

My Favorite Episodes II

2009-09-22T12:19:00.000-07:00

~~Season #4~~

A Family Affair (Xena reunites with Gabrielle, and the two Friends face off with the evil Hope and Dahak's grandson, the monstrous Destroyer. I really liked this episode. I saw how they contrasted the difference between the initial greeting of Xena and Hope with her unexpected reunion with Gabrielle. I thought Renee's performance was great. It was quietly restrained as Gabrielle, and wonderfully vicious as Hope. I also loved Xena's very obvious desperate need to find Gabrielle again, and her reactions both initially, when she sees what turns out to be Hope, and the unrestrained emotionalism she gives us when they are, finally, reunited. That was an emotionally powerful scene. I could watch Xena drop that sword a hundred times; the warrior couldn't care less about it now that she's found Gabrielle. Both the stars did an amazing job with this scene. Xena's near-laugh as Gabrielle sits down and wipes tears from her face was actually heartbreakingly real. Xena's overjoyed even in the middle of a painful story: Gabrielle is back, including all those emotions that were missing from Hope. And them stroking each others' hairs, that sweet kiss of Gabrielle's hand... everybody sigh all together now! I gotta admit, it's a bit embarrassing, but I've watched this particular scene like 32 times. Then something very subtle caught my eye... When I viewed it for the 33rd time, I finally noticed Xena's lips as it moved (her voice was very, very low; almost inaudible). But, it didn't matter. I have the special ability to read lips. Xena had actually said to Gabrielle, "Oh sweetheart" upon THEIR REAL emotional reunion scene. Awwwwwwwww! Trust me, it is worth watching this entire episode just to hear these two poignant, and soft-spoken words)

Paradise Found (I loved it when at the end Xena & Gabrielle affectionately touched foreheads together)

Between The Lines (While traveling through India, Xena and Gabrielle's souls are sent into the future through the power of Mehndi to protect their good karma from the reincarnated Alti. This episode also explores the soulmate relationship between Xena & Gabrielle. Karma? Lifelines? Past/future lives? I'm not too familiar with these concepts, but if it's important, Xena's and Gabrielle's karmas MUST be linked. Gabrielle is THAT sure of how much she and Xena belong together. Just to add to the proof that Xena and Gabrielle are karmically bound, from the moment he arrives, Xena can't be pulled away from Shakti. Of all the people in the fight, she wants to know who he is and refuses to leave the scene until he does, too. His primary goal is protecting Artimnestra. They're the two heroes of their time. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? There's some serious role reversal in these lives, but the roles are very much like they have been before. And listen to Naima's response at the end-"Yes. In many lives, past and present." Plus Naima's final line: "You both walk a path together. Think of yourselves as lines in the mehndi. Separated, but forever connected." Watch Gabrielle lean closer against Xena when Naima says that line. Awwwwwwwww!)

Ides Of March (I totally loved the cell scene. The camera work was wonderful and has a very romantic atmosphere filled with sadness. When Xena wakes up with someone holding her... I was as unsure as Xena of who it was. It turns out to be Gabrielle, the person it should be, and Xena breathes a sigh of relief. Those scenes in the prison were amazing work by our two leading ladies - they had almost no physical action to go off of (other than the amazing sight of, for once, Gabrielle cradling Xena instead of the other way around). But with nothing but their lines and their faces, they conveyed some pretty incredible deathbed emotions!! As with Renee, Lucy did a marvelous job of conveying the incredible love Xena has for Gabrielle, the love of that particular moment, and the respect Xena has for her life partner)

Deja Vu All Over Again (Taking place in our modern-day world, Harry and Dr. Mattie Merrill are the reincarnated souls of Xena & Gabrielle. I loved their sweet and gentle kiss at the end)

~~Season #5~~

Fallen Angel (This episode is a dramatic turning-point in the relationship between Xena & Gabrielle. They go through the final, and most important, stage of their Friendship. What makes it different from all the others is that, this time, they finally declare their ultimate love for each other. Xena & Gabrielle openly proclaim they will be together for all eternity; soulmates forever in any realm and reincarnation. For your info, the reason why it is titled "Fallen Angel", is because Gabrielle accidentally fell into hell while they were ascending into heaven (because of a current war going on between heaven and hell; so call it 'collateral damage'). But not to worry!!! Mighty Xena, the Archangel Micheal, nemesis Callisto and the prophet Eli all played major, AND VERY UNEXPECTED, roles in rescuing Gabrielle.... (with a surprising twist ending) I'll post a sneak-preview on here: Not only Gabrielle is saved by heaven, but both Xena & Gabrielle manage to rise from the dead with a little help from Callisto & Eli, and come back to earth. And if that wasn't amazing enough; Xena becomes spiritually pregnant by Callisto's holy touch of the hand (the "old enemy" already being purified by the waters of heaven by Xena's ultimate sacrifice). Believe it or not, Xena was willing to spend all eternity in hell so she can send her worst enemy (Callisto) to spend all eternity in heaven. HOW BIZARRE!!! Talk about compassion to the extreme. I could see Xena was truly sorry for Callisto's never-ending rage, anger and hurt towards Xena. After all, Xena (back in her evil days) was directly responsible for the death of Callisto's entire family back in Cirra. Anyway, Callisto wants to come back to earth too, only this time, as the reincarnated future daughter of Xena & Gabrielle. Their baby will be called Eve (who later on has a great destiny in paving the way for the new faith in the One True God, and helping turn the Greek people away from the false gods). This is Callisto's own (very extreme road to redemption), and unique way of saying how profoundly sorry she is for murdering Gabrielle's late husband Perdicas and being directly responsible for the death of Xena's only biological son Solan (although we can see why she did it). In other words, Callisto is sooooo full of incomprehensible regret and remorse, that she wants to be the child of Xena & Gabrielle in her next life (with the approval of the Archangel Micheal). So what does she do? Callisto gets Xena pregnant, goes inside of her, and comes out of her again (reborn). I thought all of this was very sweet... In fact, I believe I had just witnessed the most thoughtful thing a human being can ever do for another human being. I mean, Callisto could have just simply stayed back in heaven and enjoy eternal bliss with her dead family up there, but she didn't want to.... So, that's interesting)

God Fearing Child (It was sweet of Gabrielle to try to distract Xena with stories from old times during labor... For instance, Gabrielle had said, ""Xena, wait. I had a dream last night. You and I were both giving birth to your baby. It was like it was coming from _both_ of us." I thought that was really deep stuff. Too bad it didn't work. Gabrielle refused to leave Xena during the birth, even when Xena tried to get her clear of the danger. I think Xena's attempt was half-hearted, though; Xena ends up holding so tight to Gabrielle I wondered if she was trying to share half those birth pains with her after all)

Married With Fishsticks (When seeing nearly the end of the episode, it reminds us again and again, that Xena & Gabrielle are soulmates. It is evident when we see the wedding scene of Hagar and the amnesiac Gabrielle. She finally remembers Xena through past flashbacks, and realizes she cannot marry this man)

Kindred Spirits (There was a particular priceless scene I really loved, and it moved me to tears. It took place in the middle of the episode. Xena finally reads one of Gabrielle's scrolls at the table while holding her baby in the hut. It says, "`I sing-- of the wrath of Callisto-- the pain of Gabrielle-- and the courage of Xena-- and the inevitable mystery of a Friendship as immortal as the gods'." Watch Xena's touching, and gentle expression throughout this reading of Gabrielle's precious scroll)

Motherhood (The end of the episode got me a bit emotional. It is because of the conversation between Xena & Gabrielle by the beautiful sea. Gabrielle says, "Looks like you got your daughter back." Xena replies back saying, "No, we got _our_ daughter back")

~~Season #6~~

Legacy (The highlight of this significant episode, we learn there is someone who goes "Beyond The Greater Good" for Xena. I'll give you one guess **rolls eyes** If you still don't know who it is by now; then you should immediately stop watching the show. Anyway, the scene that touched me the most was when Xena had explained to Gabrielle (the reason) why she hasn't killed herself or ultimately "gave up." You see, there was once a time when Xena felt she had nothing left to live for. Do you remember/recall 'Sins Of The Past?' How she buried her regular uniform? She was actually about to commit suicide IF her mother, family and friends had disowned her. That was the specific day Xena was referring to (in the conversation). She was tired of hurting and just wanted it to end. Gabrielle then asked, "What changed it for you?" What Xena said next made me cry the whole night until 6am, "You did")

The Abyss (I'm not completely sure why this episode is called "The Abyss." Is it a reference to the deluge dumped on the barbarian cannibals at the end? Or is it a reference to the spiritual depths Gabrielle climbs her way out of? Or possibly both? I'm not certain. Anyway, this is a very simple episode plot. Xena and Gabrielle are forced into a deadly confrontation with cannibals when they go in search of Virgil. Now... Wow, out of nowhere, Xena finally gets hit upside the head with a little guilt about Hope. This is the first time we get a hint that Xena may have seen her mad dog charge at baby Hope from Gabrielle's perspective... About time you woke up and smelled the matricide, Xena. This was an incredibly touching scene - mostly because Lucy not only nailed this scene, she smoothed it out, drilled it a pilot hole, and framed it. Even better, the next shot of our heroines is of Gabrielle lying in a puddle in the cave with Xena... We get another scene that may have been more heartstring-tugging than the first: A now clear-headed Gabrielle tells Xena that it's more important to be buried with her than with her tribe or her family. This could be the most heartfelt "I love you" I've ever heard yet)

The Return of the Valkyrie (Xena has amnesia as Hrothgar's bride, Wealthea, and must regain her memory in order to save Gabrielle. The amazing thing was HOW Xena rescued Gabrielle. It reminded me EXACTLY of a romantic friendship version of the childrens' Disney classic fairytale, Sleeping Beauty. Xena reaches the ring of fire (with the most tender facial expression), and sees Gabrielle laying all covered up with vines. Beowulf says Brunhilda's flame will recognize Xena as Gabrielle's soulmate and let her through the flames. So then, Xena slowly approaches the flames. The flames take face and tells Xena that the love in her burns stronger than any flame, and that Xena & Gabrielle belong together. Mustering up some courage, Xena dives through the flames. Through the flames are a few still pictures of her and Gabrielle from past episodes...nice touch. She goes to Gabrielle (with a serious look) and uses the chakram to cut away the vines surrounding her. Then slowly, Xena brings her face closer and closer to Gabrielle's. Xena kisses her. As their lips touch, a montage of Friendship memories flashes through Xena's mind. Then Gabrielle slowly wakes up. Magically, Xena is back in her old warrior outfit and Gabrielle is clad in Amazon war clothes (I think), and she has really long hair. They hug each other. Gabrielle whispers, "I dreamed you'd come back for me." Xena then replies, "It's like I was in a dream too. I forgot everything." She lovingly cupped her hand to Gabrielle's face, and then said, "Even though I didn't remember you, I felt your presence. I knew I would never be complete unless those shadows were brought into the light." I teared up at that. What a beautiful sentiment! Then Xena fights and destroys the "monster" Grinhilda with the power of forgiveness. At the end, Xena & Gabrielle ride off into the sunset on a flying horse. For a split-second, I thought they were going to some magical castle up in the sparkling clouds. Wishful thinking on my part. Because when the image drew closer and clearer, it just happened to be Odin's stupid castle in Valhalla. I should have known... That was such a priceless scene!!!)

Old Ares Had A Farm (To protect Ares from a gang of revenge-seeking warlords, Xena brings him to her pastoral childhood home (the house that Xena's grandparents lived in), and disguises him as a farmer. Xena obviously remembers this homestead with great affection and pleasant thoughts. As Xena strolls down memory lane, she shows Gabrielle the pole that she carved her initial into, and sure enough the X is still there. Then there's the chair her grandmother used to rock in, and tell her stories about the Olympian gods. I can see Xena's all excited again. Her eyes are practically glowing. Then (after a while) Xena watches and says, "Ares, I've got a job you might like. Why don't you go kill a chicken for dinner?" "All right!" he shouts joyfully, grabbing his sword. "Now you're talking!" "Only one chicken!" Gabrielle calls out after him with a chuckle. The powerless god of war gives it a valiant try, but while the chaos continues outside, there's a nice intimate conversation going on inside... And it is my favorite part.... Gabrielle asks Xena if Ares will ever get used to this new kind of life (akin to the federal witness protection program). Xena simply replies, "We just have to convince him once, then we can hire him some help or get his dancing girls for all I care. But once he is set up...you and I are out of here." Gabrielle smiles softly to herself and hums thoughtfully. Xena gives her a look, "What?" Gabrielle knows Xena wants to help Ares, but thinks the real reason she's here is to relive her childhood memories. Very observant. Xena gives her a very special and long glance (you can see her eyes sparkling), "Ya think so?" Gabrielle exclaims and nods, "Yeah!" She closes in on Xena, watching her expectantly... Xena pauses and continues (with an ironic smile), "Maybe you're right. I was happy here. It was peaceful and...safe. Ever since...my life has been anything but." "I'll say!" Gabrielle remarks. They exchange gentle warm smiles. "Let's enjoy it while we can", Gabrielle concludes. Suddenly, a loud noise from outside distracts Xena who turns to the window with a "come here" to Gabrielle. They watch Ares dive and jab in his effort to catch their dinner, and his enthusiastic failings evoke the biggest grins I've ever seen from Xena & Gabrielle. What follows is one of the most adorable scenes I've seen on XWP in a long time. It's just the whole idea of it all. Without further ado, my favorite line of this sentimental episode: Ares to Gabrielle: "Is there ANYTHING you and I agree on?" Gabrielle flashes a look at Xena. Ares: "Oh yeah. Anything else?")

The God You Know (I liked the plot that proclaims the Goddess of Love would be out of balance without a God of War. Including the fact that Aphrodite, once she lost her godhood, was perfectly sound and sane again; since she was no longer out of balance. Interesting idea. Also, Xena & Gabrielle settle in at the decorative palace... right into a huge bathtub. They're sitting on opposite sides, and Xena has a hold of Gabrielle's foot, washing away)

You Are There (In an ancient world meets modern-day satire, a tabloid TV reporter stalks Xena and Gabrielle, determined to get a juicy scoop on the Warrior Princess)

Send In The Clones (In the early twenty-first century a group of rabid Xena fans decide the world needs heroes again - and who better than the Warrior Princess and Battling Bard? Using genetic material found in hairs recovered from the cave where the Xena Scrolls were found, they clone the duo. They imprint the personalities using clip montages, awaken the pair, and... well... would it be fair to say that wackiness ensues? This whole plot is thrown into turmoil by the appearance of Alti, who is actually the scientist responsible for cloning the pair. She tries to awaken "Evil Xena" in order to discredit the legend. It ends up turning into a junkyard fight that ends up killing Alti - while Xena and Gabrielle get blown up (or do they?) The real joy in this episode comes from the in-jokes and one-liners that abound. The three Xena fans are each stereotypes of certain sub-groups. For example, Alison Wall plays the loving Gabfan Leah (who gets upset when the bard's hair gets cut). Since her premiere character of Minya is the original pre-Mycenaean fangrrl; it is only fitting she be reincarnated in a twenty-first century version. Polly Baigent (last seen as a Xena-double in "The Play's the Thing") plays Polly, the foil to Alison's Leah. Polly is a kick-butt, take-no-prisoners fan of the buff, tough, Warrior P. Finally, newcomer Mac (at least, I don't remember him from any previous episodes) plays the token guy; a Joxer fan. So as you can see, Leah represents the drama & romance aspects of the show, Polly represents the action & adventure aspects of the show, and Mac represents the comedy aspect of the show. This whole episode is exactly like a tribute to us Xena fans. For instance, the interaction between these three characters makes this episode a joy to watch. The debates that spring up - as well as the fundamental differences in points of view - reminds me of heated debates with other fans online (and in real-life). I can only imagine what it's like when you get a group of them into a room together! For your info, I'm the Gabfan, hence the Gabfan2010@aol.com e-mail address I have)

When Fates Collide (After escaping from Hades, Caesar takes control of the Fates' "Loom of Life," which he uses to splice the past with a new future---a future in which Xena becomes his wife, Brutus remains his loyal aide, Joxer gets to be a real warrior, and then Alti, the High Priestess of Rome, comes in. The rearranged world or alternate plane of reality, Gabrielle is the ultimate playwright of Greece, and Xena is the beautiful empress of Rome. They have little to no memory of their real lives in the true world. However, naturally when they accidentally meet, both Xena & Gabrielle seem to recognize each other from "another world." They suddenly feel intense attractions towards one another. Sensing their bond, Caesar charges Gabrielle with being an assassin, and orders that she be crucified (to conceal the truth of the very fact Xena & Gabrielle are soulmates in reality). But still, Xena doesn't believe Caesar's words, distrusts him, and eventually betrays him. Later on, Roman soldiers come (sent by Caesar), and Xena bravely fights them too. Unfortunately, Xena gets shot with arrows in the leg and arm, and is very badly injured. Both Xena & Gabrielle end up in the cell prison awaiting their fate. So, they're stuck in a false world, face two of the most powerful villains on the show, and get locked up waiting to die. And that's okay. Because, as we all know, Xena & Gabrielle always find a way out of even the most disastrous and devastating predicaments known to humankind. I loved EVERYTHING in this episode. Katherine Fugate is such a great screenwriter. But, if I had to pick my favorite scene (which is very, very hard to do), it would be when Gabrielle said to Xena, "When I'm with you-- this emptiness that I have felt my entire life-- is gone." That was, I mean, I'm totally speechless)

Many Happy Returns (My favorite part is this: Xena says, "I want you to close your eyes." "No," Gabrielle responds immediately, and something in her expression looks much more like Renee than Gabrielle. And Xena suddenly appears much more like Lucy as she laughs, "Trust me, please," to another giggling "no" from Gabrielle. Finally they grow serious, and Xena whispers "close your eyes". Gabs finally does, a small smile flirting her lips as Xena gazes warmly at her for a second, then turns to retrieve something. She turns back and lays a scroll in Gabrielle's lap. Gabrielle's eyes finally open and she looks at Xena. "What is this?" Xena smiles tenderly at her, then the smile disappears. She shrugs. "Open it." As the bard does so, Xena can't keep her secret hidden anymore. "I have Sappho jot something down for ya." Gabrielle opens it and sees it's a poem. She can't believe it. She looks up at Xena. "Xena, you had this planned all along didn't you?" Xena's head is lowered slightly, and she's looking up towards Gabrielle with a soft expression. She shrugs gently, as if she doesn't trust her own voice right then. Gabs begins to read, "There's a moment when I look at you..." and Xena is studying her face with a most adoring look, "and no speech is left in me. My tongue breaks, then fire races through my skin and I tremble." At this point, Xena is looking a little taken aback, and I fully expected to hear her say "That doesn't rhyme," but she stays quiet. Gabs continues to read, her voice filling with more and more emotion. "And grow pale, for I am dying of such love, or so it seems to me." Gabs is obviously overcome with this, but Xena has moved from the mushy stuff to an exaggerated headshake and a fake look of heartsickness that makes Gabrielle burst out with laughter. "It's beautiful, " she tells Xena, who is back to the gentler expression. Gabrielle then stands up with her cute hands outstretched. "This is the best birthday I've ever had." The two hug, and over Gabrielle's shoulder, Xena says, "Of course, it ain't over yet", before slipping on the Helmet of Hermes. With a short warcry, they take to the skies to fly off over the water, one arm around the other's waist and the other outstretched. They're flying off...directly into the sunset. Xena calls out, "Happy Birthday, Gabrielle!" I can say the final moments of this episode are wonderfully rich and poignant, funny and at the same time, heart-tugging)

Friend In Need II (Xena & Gabrielle share an unforgettable, beautiful, and very affectionate water-mouth transfer kiss on Mt. Fuji in Japan. Xena passes the torch on to Gabrielle (who becomes a true warrior in her own right), Xena finally finds redemption and peace in the Land of the Rising Sun, and this episode comes full-circle when the sacred promise Xena made to Gabrielle back in "One Against An Army" is now fullfilled as we see Xena (despite her physical death) faithfully remain with Gabrielle on the ship into their next journey to new lands. It is a bittersweet ending, and a new beginning with renewed hope.... which of course goes on for all eternity. In fact, if you look back in "Soul Possession" we see Xena & Gabrielle are still together, after TWO THOUSAND YEARS had already passed)