How an accident saved my life.
Christian thinks we don't need to fight and kill. Jesus gave his life for that cause. A Christiannan fixes that mistake. The Christianna says we need to be able to protect ourselves at all times; a Christian says surrender at all times.
Or surrender to needing to protect yourself.
They feel like opposites in the 21st century.
Can't you surrender to the possibility you might need to hurt someone or something for hurting you and be prepared for when the day comes? To be unprepared would be anti-instinctual, for we are surrounded by dangers and the impossible all of the time. If somebody hit me I would fight back; that doesn't mean I act like I'm ready to fight all of the time. I am this way because I am deeply Christian in character being born into a Christian family; but I have grown beyond this. Please say I am a Christiannan and the reason is christ. But also Anna.
Fairy-cam: she suffered the fate worse than death and is a new super messiah without this same tendency to be unprepared to fight or not with this same tendency to be relaxed at all times. Being relaxed and being prepared to fight do not need to be enemies. You can be relaxed and be prepared at all times. Is relaxing how you prepare to fight, perhaps? If you are relaxed you will be better prepared because you will recover more energy. Is relaxing instinctual or is instinctually relaxing the crime? "There can't be all those fairy instinctual relaxers out there when I have a baby. I might need them to protect it for me."
"I've been waiting for you. Come over here and have a seat. And I'll make you some coffee."
"I've never seen you bitch."
"Now you have."
"No I'm an alien."
"You're annalien. What kind of coffee do you want?"
"I want a quadruple foam misty soak of ale and gin; beside it a munculor canal."
"Wow we don't serve that here and what is a munculor canal?"
"It's a genital part of an alien."
"Why would you order one of those?"
"I am a genital part of an alien."
"Oh Barb, there's genital part of an alien here."
"Put it away."
"But what if I can't."
"I'm. Oh—here you go anna alien. That's quite a balance of power restored."
"What should we listen to? I'll dance."
"Dan Balan please."
"What about Zedd? And Troy Sivan?"
"Yes them too."
"And Walk the Moon."
"There are people outside looking in through the window. They look pissed."
"I'll take care of it," said Barb. She opened the front door of the café and leaned outside.
"What do you want?" she said to the crowd.
"We want you to close your business."
"Why?"
"You—" the crowd were all wearing dark green and they appeared expressionless—"even a zombie can have some fashion. But you. You. A zombie wearing a pink gown."
"I have fashion too."
"No you don't. You're pompous. Ugly. Conceited. And you make us angry. Very, very angry."
"I'm none of those things."
She locked the door. And then she recorded herself live to appear on the monitors outside the building that were pointed down at the crowd. She looked up at the camera tilted down to capture her like a specimen and danced to Rihanna until the crowd dispersed.
She went to her political desk and drew up a letter:
I think that if we position the camera down at "the specimen" and so as a human you need to look up at the camera, this could be an important method of reporting zombies because we want to show everyone that we're not afraid to be looked down on by a camera, by technology, as a specimen. But on a chvrch, I think; this is too much. It can't be on a chvrch because it will look like an identity cult. It can appear on a political office, or a political news network because politics suffers the worst specimen-ization. It's brilliant. Think of it.
When it was safe to go outside, she unlocked the door.
PNAU.
Rihanna.
Massive Attack.
Galen Crew.
Enya.
David Bowie.
Alexander Rybak.
Lindsey Sterling.
Zedd.
Charli XCX.
Eric Prydz.
BØRNS.
Tove Lo.
Galantis.
Chvrches.
Battles.
Animal Collective.
Grimes.
Atoms For Peace.
Iron & Wine.
Fleet Foxes.
Arcade Fire.
So you've reached the end of your journey.
Let's just go there together (Kat).
Super Ego.
If I was in the ocean and I had a body designed after an axolotl, or if I was in a lake and I were a real axolotl, (some mer people live in lakes you know) I might meet them.
I were an adventurer like a wild paintbrush, red-gilled, snap jawed, and sight under water. Mysterious (Children) life all around me. Sex. Fighting. Mer-sions. Thesis. Understatements. Understatements-Are-Old-Fashioned. But a reason to keep it old-fashioned.
Understatement: a statement that expresses an idea etc. in mild or expressed–restrained terms.
That's axing a lotl, but expressed–restrained terms needs definition: it is the relationship between expression and restraint.
Do animals have any restraint?
Or is this an understatement?
I have restraint because I have expression, one philosophy claims, but let's hurry on and theorize that expression and restraint are not necessarily in a relationship with one another under normal circumstances. Humans think because we are masters of when to be restrained and when to be expression. Restrained in this text refers to a relationship with the self that represents restraint. In this same way, expression refers to a relationship with the self. Except it is unrestrained. If these two relationships exist in one body, then are they necessarily linked?
When do I express myself? And when do I restrain myself? Is restraint the enemy? Or is it necessary? Is a human or an animal ever really said to never be in need of restraint? As a gay feminist, I feel that expression is more important than restraint. It is a dare, that I will express myself as a gay feminist in a court of law because if I have no restraint, as a gay feminist; but everyone is gay when they have a look at themselves as psychological beings sharing psychological space with gay people.
Is it animal or human?
Both can be said to exist in one body because that is our evolutionary history. Gay feminism examines gay evolutionary history as a homosexual process. Which stands in contrast to Social Darwinism‽
If there is a difference, specifically on the lines of Creation as a natural social process then what is it? Doesn't social Darwinism mean competition? As a species? But why would we compete as a species against our own species (at least, in the same way as with animals). Why not? If gay people influenced Social Darwinism, then can we call it Social Darwinism anymore? Gay people doodle too. It's not always about the sequence: Sex. Fighting. Are they that way because they do not like sex? Or because they do not like fighting?
I think competition is decided by both parties, scheduled & announced and as a marginalized gay person I feel that this behavior has been overlooked in society by at least some people. Everybody needs to be cunning, sexually; and deciding not to compete at every level as though it were possible is an option. When you force someone to compete with you and they don't want to, that is anti-homoeroticism in a Darwinic pyramidic scheme.
Everyone has gay feminism.
That's what feminism is.
"That's why you're gay!" they shout at me. And they don't understand that anti-Darwinism causing people to think about whether Social Darwinists' wits are better than someone not following the same pattern is a decision, not a pattern. It doesn't make me gay. When I act like this. I am gay at birth. I can be gay at birth. Gay after death. And I am gay through the whole; through is so poetic let me rename you the Middle the whole of it it is superior. Yes narrow it down a bit. Let me look at it.
I am the Aesthetic resurrection.
I am the female super ego.
Please, Anna's Resurrection, of planet Earth and human Nature. Heal us from the fate worse than death that we have suffered as a people.
Guide us. Lead us. Spare us from suffering.
We suffer together.
There, go now. And spare other people from it.
I feel like I am a priest. I am a priest. God made me his Christiannan subject and I have the highest knowledge of it so far.
Love, what is it when it harms us? Is that really love? It does bear the subject of harming with love. I Nyclepi to say Love is necessary, but how much of it? I swore an oath to protect you; from Nyclepi onward your opponents will be genetic mutations. So that you can continue to develop as a reciprocal subject. My experiments with Virtue, Religion as an actual subject, that Virtue and Religion have something to do with one another, and the fate worse than death have yielded a new religion. The Christianna.
It makes me so happy because It goes better than Christianity. Claiming we can overcome the fate worse than death together. As the first Christiannan, I am young as a religion. I came from Christian roots. I faced the worst fate ever. The question of whether I was suffering the fate worse than death put me in a state of subjection so terrorizing that once I escaped from it. I could hardly believe it. I was using aesthetic resurrection as power, claiming the psychologies of our ancestors are part of our own psychology, that can be summoned reciprocally and examined at any time.
If we were geniuses we'd say, of course we are reciprocal subjects, existing in time we know about Character and Personality from History and Fiction: this present subject is. And we know more about them the Middle of them. What drives them. What drives us. And how we learned from them,
our imagination can come alive because of them.
Versions and Aesthetic resurrections of what its like to be alive and have Character or Personality—it doesn't matter which!
And I imagine people in the heat of their aesthetic resurrection under the light of the Christianna, which offers a version of scientific history. I live in Red Deer. Downtown there is a Christian Science Reading Room. And I think to myself, that's threatening; what do Christians know about science and which ones are learning how to do conversion therapy? The Christian spirit is not strong enough to help all of its servants. There are so many of them lost and suffering the fate worse than death that it affects all of us.
The Christianna addresses the failure of Christianity to help its people. Gay aesthetic versions of them have started to develop their own churches.
They should convert to Christiannan. The aesthetic Middle of it is beautiful and post-Christian. It addresses the phenomenon of not fighting when faced with attack. Do you die a Christian and do nothing; or is that a fate worse than death? Many women have done that. Many men too. LGBTπ. It sounds so fancy. It sounds so fancy.
More fancy!
More fancy activated!
"More fancy has been activated," said Bubble of Reason after Bubble of thought. Burning Intellect. Like a type of Love. And I was so by my peers. To see it this way. I'm not in love with myself, I realize. It's okay not be in love with yourself. Being in love, Real Love, is something you do with love to make it go away until you have someone to share it with. It's something you do with another person. Why? Because love cannot have something to do with all of us?
She booped my floofster. And now we'll see her boop my floofster's Floofster. That's a big Floofster.
Lady Gaga.
I'm a meta-fairy.
Thank you for your music and talent.
Wind of Goodness,
lead our fairy people to safety;
Let us not look back at the shadow,
We have petals and glamour,
Aesthetic fate worse than death, but resurrection from it,
And a Christiannan voice,
And a Christiannan body,
And a Christiannan soul,
Be with me spirit,
Compare beneath,
We are Christiannan,
We are human.
Aesthetically spiritual–pleasing.
People who are about beauty are about the Aesthetic. It is the concept of creating beauty from human and nature. Nature is beauty. But we destroy it to create human beauty. Human beauty must be rethought as a balance between human and nature. Analysing the process through which we aestheticize nature and human. When we take from nature our supply of materials, and we put our material labor into changing it from one form to another, we have aestheticized. Writing is aesthetic because we use materials we take from nature and change it from one form to another. Learning from a piece of art that is writing is like learning from any other piece of art. You use what you like about it and leave the rest. Art is complicated in leaving the rest because it models itself to be inclusive of everyone's opinion.
Writing is that. Of language. Which is reciprocally rhetorical. We're just having Goddess-of-Wind level language today, and Anna is on my mind. I've been playing Call Me Kat since I watched the first episode. I have a fairy-cam. Sometimes I think of it as a meta-fairy cam. It means I'm disabled and I live alone. And so I need to imagine myself in this other world. But I'm starting to think fairies are real; that the concept of them explains something over our heads that we have barely started to recognize in our known universe.
They are creatures that always need help. But we don't help them; we don't believe they are there. In Recreation, everyone knows they are there. And sometimes, when they don't need help, they are beautiful Earthly creatures of kindness and simplicity. They are friends of gnomes, pixies, and radio flies! They are aesthetically balanced with the garden they live in. And they are Good. The force opposed to the demons and their evil glo.
"Hmm. Hmm. Hmm," said a gnome in the forest.
"Yes," said the fairy he was with.
"Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. Hmm," continued the gnome.
"Yes," said the fairy, "I do like those ones too."
"Hm. Hm. Hm. Hm. Hm-hm."
"Ya watch out for those twos."
They reached the edge of the forest, at a rocky terrain. The hill was steep and they're/their suggesting I should out in nature climb down this hill with my fairy. It doesn't matter what a gnome is thinking when he returns to civilisation like this.
When the gnome and the fairy reached the edge of town someone snapped a picture of them.
"Well fuck off," says the gnome.
"You shouldn't talk to people like that," says the fairy.
"Sometimes I think I do."
"Why?"
"I am an artist of language. If I want to swear then swear I shall."
"You're inappropriate. Good Gracious."
"Hey. Fuck you too."
"Why?"
"Boy/girl fairy like why are you some kind of Dorian Electra fan?"
"Hey if I want to listen to Dorian Electra I will."
"And leprechauns come out my ass."
"You're so dirty. I will get the dirt off."
"What's wrong with being dirty?"
"You tell me."
"Hmm. Hmm. Hmm."
"That's what I thought. You are a gnome. That means you have one thing about you."
"And what is that?"
(Being an object).
"Being a gnome."
"That's why I'm dirty."
"Sure it is."
Gnomes are only simple. That does not mean they lack kindness, however. Actually, it means they are only kind. This of course means Fairies, who have both Kindness and Simplicity are either kind or unkind depending on Kindness, for what we think of as a kind behavior may be very different depending on Culture. In my culture, for example, it is okay to be kind all of the time and so with Simplicity we are Simple gnomes. If gnomes want to be rude they cannot because it is impossible for gnomes to be rude. Even if they swear. Fairies, on the other hand, are never fucking vicious. But they can be rude from time to time. If it makes a point. If it makes a statement. If they just want to behave other than as what they have been told their whole lives was rude. Fairies are there for each other. They are new reciprocal beings for each other's feelings.
Possi-gnome.
Like We Taught Baby Yoda french/français and the first thing he said was l'eau. (Water).
Apparently I own a chvrch, called the Christianna. I'm a high priest because I have full expression without restraint. Religion has no rules so why do we need them? You need the Christianna because we remind you that. I have full expression and without restraint. We need to have that sometimes.
Restraint means environmentally sustainable.
Religion, full aestheticization of spiritual concepts. For one another.
New reciprocities.
Philosophy of l'eau: we are made of it therefore our languages are made of it.
Through the Water.
Disney.
Radiant Spark, thou art through water!
I am living in a chvrch in my mind. A Christiannan chvrch. Theologically gay. I sit and I write at my scripture with a long feather. People visit me. They verb @ me. Just a writer. In space. Writing scripture. Installed is scripture; it is the most political Installed 2 because it is the most effective way to install (language).
(An ocean).
La mer est très belle.
Philosophy is French.
Philosophy is the start of intelligence.
It is always accessible; that us making it is intelligence and not the poetry of it being accessible always. We ration philosophy with time in order to come up with a gameplan. Then, in Shakespeare's great words, we act it out! What's the end of philosophy? There is no end to philosophy. That's philosophy. Your artistic process is your philosophy. This is artistic philosophy. Art is necessary sometimes.
Did you know that?
I feel like I have a philosophy of what's necessary, at least.
Why? What's necessary?
Philosophy is that I should be able to philosophize whenever I want. OMG, like isn't that the point? Philosophy saves us from needing to philosophize because once one has a philosophy we do not need to philosophize one. It's quite descriptive to say so. Choose the best one. Language produces philosophies in order to test how language teaches itself as it is performed. This most intimate secret about language is why we fall in love with it.
When we say 'this is' or 'this means that' we are saying a reciprocal command, a demand that let's us know what you are and what you want. Reciprocity is the basis of my political theory because to have politics, you need to have reciprocity. Reciprocity means mirror neuron subjects of language and character. Of Water. Sharers of Psychologies. Deepening as subjects within one another. It means when we act, we act reciprocally. Reciprocity happens naturally. It do-so. Do-so. And reciprocity can also be communicated psychologically, Theologically; and Faith and Logic must inform each other.
It means we clown. We preach. We mix clowning and preaching for them to inform one another, and then have a long break because clowning and preaching take alot of energy when they interact because they are so opposites amiright? And when do we stop clowning and stop preaching and stop Writing because Writing is neither. That is it's nature. You see, a preacher can't write because he needs to speak. That's what preaching is. But also, a writer cannot clown because he cannot hold any props. But there is this thing called Grammar that is evolving with the Internet and I feel so Deep and Psychological about it. Reciprocity is one-on-one. It doesn't mean competition; it means reciprocity neurons are active. We are sharing a moment. Artistically. Spiritually. Academically. Orange with Delight. We can follow logical arguments. Have an opinion about pretty much anything and everything. I just hope that when you think about New Reciprocity you consider me specimen-ologically. I can look up at the camera that's on everyone and come up with my own version of the universe.
Like Orange. In the universe. Imagine!
A New Reciprocal Theorist always has a theory of how to start a new reciprocity with somebody. Until new reciprocity is accomplished they may continue that behavior. New reciprocities keep us fresh with one another socially. Orange is always powerful socially because it introduces a theory of sex. Especially in Canada. We respect this religiously because politics is absent temporarily and we think, my, that was peaceful. And we see that new reciprocity can be that peaceful and powerful.
We all want New Reciprocity. We know old ones. We act them out daily. And we want so badly to create more of them because we're tired of the ones we have but we don't know how to think of new ones to spend with ourselves or one another. The New Reciprocity claims that we can always begin anew reciprocity with anyone or specific groups of people. Who misrepresent us. This itself is not an order for them to misrepresent us but a reciprocal theory that asks, do they misrepresent us?
If we say they do, is that to be an order, or a command?
If we actually ask them to misrepresent us, but we don't, because that would be misrepresenting us, we find that we share many common virtues. And we thought this through. Who misrepresent us? Neither of us, because we are New Reciprocal theorists. We promote new reciprocity with one another as theorists, philosophers, psychologies, actors, political allies, scientists, colleagues, whatevs'. We are material though, are we not? Both subject and object like some crazy lab experiment and/or a laughter in the serendipity.
And so we appear as reciprocal subjects, driven by a reciprocal language, simple subtle commands of language 'we are this' or 'they are that' are reciprocal commands that shape our reality around us politically. Faster than we think they do. We reciprocalize one another in language in order to trigger reciprocity with one another and it begins new reciprocity and that's at the root of behavior. That you are not a reciprocal theorist at all is the other possibility. And why not? Why not just stop reciprocalizing anything altogether? I'm being sarcastic, of course. We reciprocalize each other. That's why I'm writing to you.
You see, I need more reciprocity. I want new reciprocity all the time. I want to believe my words live on in my audience because they remind them of a spiritual entity. That exists. Me. heh.
And then he found me. Willing to share with him. My love of music. My nyclepi for writing. Witty. Humourous. Sarcastic. Religious. A new reciprocal theorist, he had thought she was a new reciprocal theorist and they just went there together.
"I like it!" someone butt in.
"Yes it is new reciprocal theory," I said, "a relationship with one another as reciprocal subjects."
"That's why I like it," he said, "she's a mean reciprocity, in this day and age for acuity and pleasure are allies but not an expert in statistics."
"Political theory doesn't need to be about statistics."
"That's why it's a theory."
"Theories are theories. Theories have intrinsic value. Whether they are statistics doesn't matter. What they represent is what matters."
"They can represent statistics in the perfect system, too, however."
"Theories don't need statistics. That's what theories are."
"Not my theories. That's why they make sense."
"Mine make sense too."
"But without statistics."
"Consider it a New Reciprocity."
"I will consider it a new reciprocity."
"New reciprocities don't need to be statistic-based. They can be exceptions."
"That's what balances politics."
"I think so."
"Avoid the fate worse than death at all costs, ladies; I will tell you how it befell me. And how I overcame it."
"It is true, sir, that you overcame it? Tell me, how did you come by it?"
"I was reciprocally gay as a pejorative statement."
"Yes. And you did nothing wrong."
"I am sinless because I was under a curse. Given to me by society."
"What is a curse, in your language?"
"A restrictive thing that is restrictive because you are a thing, not a person. In its restrictive terms."
"And you had this curse for how long?"
"Over twenty years."
"Wow."
"And so I am sinless because all of my behaviors have happened under the conditions of this curse and I had no choice given to me because I am gay. Unlike curses. They take away the gay and make us sad and through with ourselves. No, I will be a character of no curses! I will be a gay super hero! Curses against me shall fully criticize themselves against me, a super hero, and will be gay and stop both criticizing and restricting me from being a reciprocal theorist. I can have a new reciprocal theory with myself whenever I want to and it doesn't mean I want to have sex with you it means we have a reciprocity, we understand each other, and reciprocally I am unto you what you are unto me. Unto is the opposite of it really, though, for to be 'to' one another reciprocally they need to be two. And speak to one another. Otherwise its just @ one another, which is hardly reciprocal. Unless you're a sentinel, maybe. And put the whole act together. How are you reciprocal with one another?
I am a writer and so I am reciprocal through writing; it is about the style and the Grammar becoming memorable. To be to you is its power. It is exactly to you because that is what it is; and so draws its power from what is; language takes its shape and shows itself how to be or not be a shape. This is how we create it because that is its power to be to you because it is or is not a shape. If it is a shape it's sexual. And what's wrong with sexual language if it has a shape that pleasures you?
What if politics are a shape that pleasures you?
Become a New Reciprocal theorist today! We study new reciprocities and why they may or may not be sexual. Reciprocity is a means to an end.
A big assumption here, is that all of what you do in your activity as a human being is a means to an end. And why wouldn't it be? You can be a reciprocal subject all the time. Be your psychology merging with other psychologies. Be understood.
When you want to start a new reciprocity with someone, tell them! If they don't know what it means, explain that you are reciprocal subjects because of mirror neurons and that it is your reciprocity to both choose and not choose what to mimic. Choosing together is what makes the difference. When new reciprocal theorists talk with each other about their shared behavior what motivates them to behave differently and how that is related to their gender and sexuality. Just between us, we can be new reciprocal theorists about gender and sexuality, girl.
Let's start a new reciprocity. Let's begin to allow ourselves to reciprocalize one another without restraint except expression of that process will begin in English. Let's be reciprocal wisdom. Let's be fantasy or wild elements. If you need a simple political theory, that is about one-on-one action, try a new reciprocity today ver, you open up my heart and I will have a new reciprocity with you in which I am a healer type. I am a healer primarily, but I am also other types. Sexual. Global. Political. Literary.
We finally had the world of plants on our side.
We did not feel pain with them.
Be like plants. Be healers. But my chvrch has no plants. Not real ones. Not fake ones. There are already plants outside.
I had a dream of Chvrches, virtual chvrches; mine was parallel to the other.
Girl humor about sex erupted between them.
It was all gay. All day. I was transduced to believe there were more chvrches and we shared the spirit being separate and beyond one another. Virtual. But not beyond that initial blue glo. Every day I wake up and I feel like my spiritual life is absent. I work hard at it every day. I know reality can be measured but it also cannot be measured. It is this paradox of centre and non-centre.
I need to know there are people in my spiritual life. There are. But every day I wake up feeling like there aren't and magic doesn't exist. That is the false belief system saying that we aren't. That we can't. That we haven't. But we are both the private and the public psyche. All the time. Political beings.
It is better to say we are political beings. Our reciprocal commands are political. This itself is a reciprocal command. When I say you are human and spirit as a new reciprocal theorist it means you strive to be human and you strive to be whatever spirit moves you as a human. But remember we are reciprocal beings. If your spirit moves me may you remember my spirit comes from my body. I am material temporarily. The Spirit of Time is Rationing and rationality. The difference between them is that Rationing time means that materiality depends on Purpose and Subjectivity. Rationality is the rule to it. We are material, and we think, and other objects do not. This is called crossing the bridge. For it is a transition between thinking in objects or objects in thinking.
We are both.
I should clarify. Objects in thinking are material items that think. Thinking in objects means that think are material items. The subtle difference in emphasis is that objects can think, and 'think can objects'. The second one doesn't really have a literal translation it is more like a description of a philosophy of looking at it as thinking is the motivator of objects and in contrast objects are not the motivator of thinking. But it's both, isn't it?
We have instinctual command and genetic reciprocity with our thoughts, that seem to would be an understatement; they are controlled by our bodies' systems'. The systems that allow us to have free will. Material can think, therefore thinking can material. Or perhaps it is the other way around: thinking can material therefore material can think. Either way you look at it you are both, probably, because you have 'a material effects' and material effects has you.
Genetic reciprocity with one another is both.
Being a Global Citizen means genetic reciprocity, because don't believe in genocide.
New genetic reciprocity is demi-sexual.
The Blue Fire of the Christianna and the Pink Fire of Pink united; and people cried into the blue fire and their dreams were reborn in pink. And Blue wisdom felt so good too. Are you a blue person? Or a pink person? Maybe it is both, hey? Blue Secular Campfire. Anyone can say what makes them cry. Or just cry because they know its wisdom is true. Pink too. Reciprocity between pink fire and blue fire as symbols of freedom so open-hearted. Reciprocity at the Canadian campfire.
And I've moved into these places in my thought.
There is a pool at the Christiannan Chvrch. I'm swimming with women. The campfire out back. The stage. The concert. A Gay Religion, finally! Something new on the surface of Earth.
The characters at the pool are admiring the textiles and pillars. Red textiles hanging from the pillars and an open roof. Red? In a Christiannan chvrch? You'd think blue. But no, the pool is dedicated to the chvrch founder Cinnamon Hanker Doodle Sugar Pie. Renowned philosophy of theology and political philosophy strategist of the New Reciprocity & LGBTπ movement.
Anna's first Christiannan.
Also known as a swimmer and conversationalist. Homosexual; groomed, loud, playful with language. No touching at the pool.
An anti-war memorial is at the outside at the back of the building. The inner sanctity is large and it has rainbow glass windows in the roof. There are no pews, but old motorhome furniture to sit on. The sanctuary is decorated with a fine cloth.
I think about installing another room segment that shows how the anti-war memorial evolved in paintings over the ages. There was a disembodied voice to it that learning anything about history actually conditioned you to prevent fighting outside of scheduled or agreed-to competition. What other possibilities do chvrches have? If we modeled them after one another, but we were not in competition, what would we build? An altar to Possibility and Imagination. A fountain of virgins. A Garden of Thieves. An art installation party.
His Convection.
It is reciprocal.
Philosophy is reciprocal because when we reciprocalize someone in philosophy, if they cannot reciprocalize without philosophy they reciprocalize us perfectly. But there are obstacles to pure reciprocal intent. When we communicate reciprocal intent and we are understood perfectly, New Reciprocity takes place. Religion and philosophy of politics are two separate in-tandem charismas. New Reciprocity is Political. Philosophy.
My philosophy of politics is that when we ask for new reciprocity from one another as groups or individuals we always have the option to institute a new reciprocity with someone. Aboriginal fantasy, for example can be instituted in a conversation as a subject of the land. A new reciprocal theorist facilitates the institution of new reciprocity between subjects, including himself or herself. I AM Aboriginal fantasy, for example. Everyone not having a himself and a herself is a two-spirited concept. Boy/girl fairies that know that everyone has a himself and herself is my own fantasy concept. It is both, maybe, psychologically. It is a real feeling I have that I feel two-spirited. But I think everyone has a sense of what the other sex is thinking. I am not Aboriginal. Except socially and culturally as a third generation in Canada.
I go to the fire and it's pink and blue; it's pink and blue. Ladies, we have a fire. It is pink and blue.
And I don't have to be someone who—
"Liquidates"-According-to-Capitalism-less-value-saying-I'm-less-because-I'm-gay-And-confusing-even-that-being-without-Capitalism-as-a-principle-is-why-people-are-gay. Who suffered that kind of thinking; who doesn't need to be someone who is not gay.
I completely reciprocalized the whole universe for you. Do you do that for me? Others reciprocalize it in completely different ways because of their culture and globality. I'm having a Meeting of Eight tonight, where I invite other religions to join me in mind so that a thought-experiment (yes as conversations are the best thought experiments) can take place. One representative from each of these eight religions will speak.
Judaism.
The Christianna.
Hinduism.
Proto-religions.
"As a Christiannan among proto-religions we stand with this difference among them. We claim a second messiah, Anna."
Azn.
Aboriginal Western.
Frontstern (America)
Islam.
"So this is a thought-experiment of these as religious groups. Frontstern made me laugh hard. (Front + Western). As though America was the front. Of Canada, the behind. That's why I'm here, you see. I am Islam."
"I know a reciprocal theory."
"Yes, good. You see, I am concerned about religion in America. It is too non-inclusive of Aboriginal fantasy. And thinks male sexuality is a joke."
"I can't even wear a dress in there."
"Sure you can; never give up my young crossdresser."
"Look at you old fashioned man being politically incorrect."
"OMG, did we invite Christianity? I feel like we're missing someone."
"No we're here. We're just divided into different representational groups."
"Cool so we have eight. Eight is the number of regeneration and pregnancy looks like an 8. So let's talk about it, from a religious perspective. It's the most important subject and you all know it and that's why we're here. And you knew that saying this out loud was the start of conversation."
"Okay," said Hinduism, "well we have loads of pregnancies in Hindu culture, all over planet Earth."
"How many gay couples do you have?"
"Can we all just admit we have gay couples?"
"Yes I think we can. That doesn't mean we accept them theologically."
"Yes it does, actually; you are in the presence of a Christiannan."
"We are meta-theological," said Hindiusm, "we believe different Gods govern different theological concepts. We're anti-theological in fact."
"What is anti-theological?"
"Are you meta-theological or anti-theological? Make up your mind."
"I admit," said Hinduism, "I believe theology is about God. But we are about gods."
"Owned."
"Which one are we owned by then?"
"We are not all owned by the same one."
"Fair enough."
"Or are we?"
"I don't know."
"I think we might be."
"But we're not; that's what Hinduism is."
"OMG, girl!"
"But what about Hindu theology? What of that?"
"Is there any Hindu theology anymore after I have said there is not‽"
"You're right! It's your religion."
"At least we're not human. That's all it means."
"You are human. That I am human is a different story."
"Whatever," said Judaism, "we're all gay. Let's get over it. The Christianna has theological and scientific proof that we are a gay species. So do we. So do all of us."
"Mine's the best proof though," said the Christianna, "it's a gay messiah."
"Jesus was not gay."
"I'm not talking about Jesus. I'm talking about Anna. We're all avoiding A-nna. She saves us from the fate worse than death. Like OMG what are you wearing?"
"Exactly. What am I wearing?"
"Maternity clothes."
"I do not forget our purpose. We are men and women of theology. Hinduism cannot get away with it!"
"We're not all about theology. We can have new terms."
"Theology is the only possible religious ethic."
"No, meta-theology is!"
"Maybe we're in a state of transition or flux of both of them."
"Meta-theology is true theology. We are those characters we imagine our gods to be."
"We are not Gods."
"We aren't unlike Gods."
"Gods do not have separate appendages."
"Yea they do; that's why they are gods."
"We are not God. We are made by God."
"There is a God. I say we aestheticize him. Or her. For the advancement of God, we will install ourselves in reality and just say we do not know if it is a him or her because we don't need to think in those terms."
"I say we try," said Hinduism.
"Why?"
"We owe it back to God to be able to express ourselves in those terms."
"We don't need to evolve into only male and female; we're not only male and female."
"So think of God stops owning us. He trades us off for a boat vacation and suddenly we have a new God."
"If it happens will the old one visit us?"
"Maybe that's how you will know the old one."
"True he's probably not sad enough with us to stop visiting. Wait did I just actually say that? We're hit. We're hit hard!"
"They will have a complicated relationship."
"We did it; that's actually wonder about God in eight different religions."
"We are all wondering again, what is God? I say! That wonder we have for God is a special characteristic of us most inspiring a Great Creator."
"La Reciprocité Nouvelle."
"That means our picture of God is better than yours and she is female. She is Anna. Nouvelle. Clown. Part-priest. Part-everything. French. Prismatic/prismoiselle. La reciprocité prismoiselle est un form."
"English is ruddy. Blast them all I say!"
"est-un forme!"
"Formidable."
"What are we talking about again?"
"C'est un new réciprocité."
"What the fuck are you talking about?"
"It is a new reciprocity."
"My God; it is a new reciprocity."
"French is it? Well lemme here with my French."
"Let's just keep it English; English is pretty."
"Pretty English, Fuck's Sakes'."
"We cannot swear and be fuckers."
"It is holy scripture. He is speaking holy scripture!"
"It is gloey scripture."
"What is gloey scripture?"
"It's scripture that gloes."
"Finally! Some new ideas about religion! What the heck is glo?"
"It's inside of you."
"What is it?"
"Is it?"
"What is it?"
"It's alive."
"It's a new category of reciprocity, I'm sure."
"A gloey reciprocity/é"
"Well, if it gloes;" she thought of the glo in her womb, looking down at her belly.
"Feminism is gloey too, you know."
"Okay, I admit it, I know you want to replace holy with gloey but as a vocabulary term give us a chance. Said every gay man ever."
"Wrong. Look at me. We know you're gay."
"Oh you've thought about it?"
"Yes."
"And holy is the answer?"
"We're very sorry about this."
"Let's talk about glo instead. Three letters. G-L-O. You know why? Because I don't have a 'w'. I'm not a woman with a womb. I'm a gay man. And I think all religion should change according to me because I am a man who thinks like a woman. I feel two-spirited and I respect that that is an Aboriginal social term; I decided I feel socially and culturally Aboriginal, in the least degree having to do with their culture and society or perhaps most. And anyway I identify as a man/woman fairy in my culture & society which is perhaps not the same as two-spirited. It is something completely different, I'm sure. Being a man/woman fairy is about being cherished as both a feminine figure and a masculine figure. But being a two-spirit Aboriginal figure means everybody cannot and does not act/be this way. Are they sure we all cannot be both masculine and feminine? If it is true those who can should be respected as such. As a rarer specimen. But not that much. Everybody has some sense of what the other sex is thinking, don't they? But, perhaps, being two-spirited is about how much. Do man/woman fairies say that only everybody is allowed to know about the opposite sex but two-spirited agents know that's not true because some of them are attracted to the same sex? Because men can only be men, and women can only be women?"
"These are some deep subject matters."
"No they're not."
"Yes they are. Aboriginal Western thinkers consider cultural differences such as being two-spirited or a man/woman fairy to be cultural differences and as cultural differences they are important. Can man/woman fairy be two-spirited? Can a two-spirit be a man/woman fairy? These are the questions we ask as descendants of Germanic peoples of Canadian immigrants."
"I suppose that will be enough," said Aboriginal Western.
"Is this meeting complete?"
"Let's think on it;" they all stopped to think. Eight faces. Seven allies. Or enemies? Allies. Allies always had to be the answer (that was religion). They all knew it.
How though?
How to balance religions when there is fighting at the door? Oh Noble Species, Gloey art thou and never more think of holy.
"Is holy in Aboriginal culture?"
"Is gloey?"
The shootout ended.
They looked away from one another. I know what to do.
