The Erotic Disposition of Homer’s Bowling Ball.

Homer Simpson

Believing there is a code to be cracked is of course much the same as believing in the existence of some Big Other: in every case what is wanted is an agent who will give structure to our chaotic social lives. – Zizek

Our attraction to figuring things out stems from the erotic drives within us all. Freud speaks of the id which part of the fundamental core within our erotic drive. What is the Id?

THE ID (‘It’): functions in the irrational and emotional part of the mind. At birth a baby’s mind is all Id – want want want. The Id is the primitive mind. It contains all the basic needs and feelings. It is the source for libido (psychic energy). And it has only one rule –; the pleasure principle: ‘I want it and I want it all now’. In transactional analysis, Id equates to “Child”.

If we see life as system, then we think we are inherently drawn to the space of tinkering with something we think is broken and something we have come to believe is merely mechanistic. Existentialism at its basic level is driven by the core of the Id. Expending ourselves over a part-object struggle is something we think we need to be committed to.

What struggle do I speak of? I am speaking into the angst of our beings, the questions that haunt us: Why am I here? Who am I? What is my purpose here? I refer to them as part-objects because they are truly things that seem to leave when we think we’ve cracked the code, but much like the Cheshire cat in Alice and wonderland they return when we least expect them to or maybe even want them to.

Maybe I can posit something here. Maybe we’ve moved beyond the ‘Why I am here?’ Phase of global identification. It does seem the world is more in tune now more than over with its purpose, but maybe now we seem to be more ontologically wired in our enquiry. What does this mean?

Ontology is the study of being.

In its simplest terms: “ontology deals with questions concerning whether entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.” Ontology is enquiry into being. But I would also say isn’t much different than existentialism. ontology is less caffeinated.

Let’s get back to cracking the code.

If life is a code we’re meant to crack, then the irony is how do we know when we’ve cracked it? And when you find the code, does that mean that code should work for me to? Because if your code is meant to work for me, and one-size fits all than most likely we’re a cosmic hoax with go-go gadget insides. Let’s dig a bit deeper. The consumer promise hidden behind the one-size fits all is the reality or non-reality showcasing the differences between all of us.

safe

In its terminology, it represses the truth, which is, that we are all different and one-size truly doesn’t fit all. In fact, i’m sure this has happened to most of us at one or another where we’ve entered into the marketplace wanting to make such a purchase and then we find the one-size doesn’t fit all. The perverse intention is to make it seem we all have the same size hands, heads, and other appendages. That in our excess, what lies outside of our torso ( the limbs represent the excess) is exactly same as the person standing next to us.

But we know this isn’t true.

Yet, we purchase in the hope that the idealistic notion can be true. That one day we can all be the same. This is the obscene gesture within a lot of multiculturalism today, it tries to assume that everyone should be treated the same, but in reality by higlighting the cause of the ‘downtrodden’ we exalt their plight above everyone else’s. Although this may not be the intention, we must look at other possible alternatives rather than destroying the very objective we seek to uphold.

There is a portion of scripture in the Bible that hilights an important point about society today.

Jesus’ friends are a bit apprehensive about their encounter with some other people who seem to be talking about jesus but aren’t hanging out with him or others. Some versions call them ‘the other disciples’. The disciples are almost in childish fashion ‘tattle-tell’ on these rogue followers of Jesus.

And basically Jesus tells these trepidacious disciples to leave them alone. If there for him then that is a good thing. It seems to be in our nature to want to force a ‘one-size fits all’ on those we meet. In fact this is the ghost of the Id, this is the childish aspect of our being.

Where our fear of being alone takes over.

In this moment, it is not merely a weak selfish moment categorized by a possible fear of social abandonment, but rather it is driven by eros. the Greek word for erotic love. A tempetous self-driven kind of love that, in the end, only benefits the giver rather than the receiver.

This is much like Homer Simpson who purchases for Marge a bowling ball with his name on it. The paradox,as I am sure you can see is that Homer is not driven by a selfless love, but a love that only benefits himself, and in so doing solidifies this erotic type love by insisting that Marge receive a gift that has been clearly purchased solely for his benefit.

When we assert that our code should fit everyone else’s this is the gift under the guise of a gift.

Although on the surface our intentions might be white as snow, at the core the pleasure principle is driving at the wheel, we are merely the shotgun passengers. The way to move forward is to take the shotgun we hold and kill that aspect of ourselves that drives us to purchase ‘bowling balls’ for others. When the bowling ball may not clearly be the best thing for them.

Short term mission trips or short terms overseas development tend to pride themselves in helping others. But in the end, do more damage than good. The missionaries of old were white, had money and were somehow linked up with God.

This belief was so pervasive, that those who participated in such things were almost treated like gods.

Overseas development shout from the mountaintops of sustainability and transformational momentum, yet the after-effects tend to be short-term and not what the indigenous population need. These types of trips are driven by the id. they are erotic gestures. They are a ‘bowling ball’. They do damage under the guise of help.

I think maybe we can learn from the professional bowlers, who, when their balls get old and worn out, throw that one away and get a new one. The examples are endless here. But the ideology of one-size fits all hurts people under the guise of helping them. What we can do is to foster a safe space for their discovery, a space where we don’t guide their journey, but simply enjoy it with them.

The Caffeinated Riots: The Reverse Perversion of Teenage Suicides



The Stonewall riots were a series of violent conflicts between homosexuals and police officers in New York City. The first night of rioting began on Friday, June 27, 1969 not long after 1:20 a.m., when police raided the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in Greenwich Village. “Stonewall,” as the raids are often referred to, is considered a turning point for the modern gay rights movement worldwide. It was the first time any significant body of gays resisted arrest.

The StoneWall Riots were one of the first times the homosexual community defended themselves against the New York City police. They took a stand and made their mark, they no longer accepted abuse as being synoymous with being homosexual.

It was a landmark event that started a much needed change.

But, the StoneWall riots actually weren’t the first protest again gay abuse. There was a small grassroots movement that initiated a sit-in in a quaint Philadelphia coffee shop in 1965. Deweys’ was a popular hangout for young gays, lesbians and drag queens. Deweys’ employee’s refused service to anyone from the LGBT community which sparked a civil sit-in. This passive resistant move has changed the way society interacts with the gay community. But, it clearly hasn’t been enough.

We might need more sit-ins.

Over the course of one month, there has been at least six recorded suicides from gay students who have been unfairly bullied by their peers. It is true as they say, fear can kill. Ironically we live in an information age where ignorance still seems to be a prevalent characteristic within our society. It seems to be an intentional igorance, people fear what they do not understand.

But, here’s the issue, why don’t they understand?

The StoneWall riots were about a people group who were seeking equality,liberation and fair treatment against the Big Other. Ironically, the Big Other was meant to be the very thing that was meant to protect them and it failed them. The New York City police did not protect and serve. They protected themselves from getting to know another human being.

When the Big Other stands in an invisible gap and expends themselves to the point that they represent the very thing they are meant to be against, we then have to begin asking how viable is this Big Other.

We then have to begin asking what is meant to be in its place. When the Big Other represents violence and protects only some from that violence it then becomes the very symbol of everything it originally was meant to be against.

That’s when the system fails us.

I think we also have to be honest about this idea of loving our neighbour which seems to be central to many religions, yet there is a lot of violent resistance emanating more specifically from the Christian community.

In this instance, the Big Other aren’t just the New York Police, but now the Big Other is also represented by the institution of Christianity. This isn’t to say all of Christianity or all of the New York Police should be flippantly demonized, it means, we have to be incredibly careful about who and what we readily associate ourselves with. I am reminded of a letter written by an early church author where he says “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Paul was responding to context that endorsed all of these separations. There were Jews and Greeks and they would violently distance themselves from one another, there were different genders and one was subordinate to the other but then he re-renders who the Big Other is. He then says everyone, all people, creation as a whole are one in Christ.

All of humanity is one.

When young teenagers are driven to kill themselves, the bullies are not the only one’s at fault, we are too. And when they kill themselves, they are killing a piece of humanity. When we allow the death of innocent teenagers to take place, we support the very perversion we say we’re against. We perpetuate the reverse perversion of the Big Other.

We can’t idylly sit by and talk about loving our neighbour any longer.

It can’t matter what version of the Bible we read, or even, dare I say what religion we adhere to. Paul says that Christ is the Big Other. The new way of life we all can and are participating in. When we allow atrocious things like the death of a teenager to easily pass across our television screens and deem it as just another death, we become the very demons we are trying to run from.

Paul is saying something radical because he isn’t introducing only a new reality, but he is dreaming up a new society as a whole. He is challenging the very indoctrinated enslavement to the Big Other that is present and is telling his listeners that this new Big Other is built upon very different foundations.

A place where the labels that distance us don’t exist.

A place where those labels cloud the unity that we were created with. This new kind of society throws all of the ethics defined by the distorted Big Other and re-orients them through the new post-colonial Big Other. I think this is also an important key to realize, because it does seem that there is ideological colonialism prevalent within the very fabric of this angry argument for
ethical territory.

The Gay Issue isn’t and never should have been an issue, but much like what Martin Luther King Jr. did for civil rights, maybe all of these movements, responses and hopes for a better society can be the very saviours needed to usher in the new Jesus society.

One where love is the political foundation of reality.

One where the label gays don’t exist, it doesn’t mean that we can have diversity or be proud of that diversity, but it means we don’t see each other as a perversion of a label.That we can see each beyond our labels.

When we cling to our labels to the point where we feel justified to destroy another human being, we then have succumbed to ideological terrorism whereby we choose to violently hold to our labels and not allow to see the human that stands behind them. We need a riot of love, embrace and self-subversion that leads to a Christological tolerance.

When we do this, we deny humanity and pervert it into nothing more than something we derive an obscene pleasure from. May we come to a place where this is no gay or straight, but all people unencumbered by titles and found in the wholeness that is humanity.

Burning our Scarecrows: Re-redefining History

Strawmen

Neo is a prefix signaling a “new” form or a revival of an old one.

Scarecrows are supposed to represent the real thing. They are meant to stand immovably in each of the fields they’ve been placed and protect it from unwanted invaders. They are a fantasy of what is meant to be. They are a perversion of the real world. It has everything but the heart it requires to sustain life.

There has been a hip new influx of re-ideology. Or neo-ideologies. So for example, there used to be fascism, but now there is neo-fascism. Or how there used to be evangelical, now there is a neo-evangelical movement in some churches. Along with the neo-evangelical, there is also a neo-monastic movement that has followed closely after. We could go on, but I hope this gives you a preview of this neo-movement of old philosophies. Its much like the straw men, they look like what they represent, but they depend on what is behind them to be informed.

This isn’t simply dissecting Christian neo-ideologies, this is challenging the concept of ‘neo-ing’ anything. If we are a society that embraces change than we should be willing to allow space for the new changes to lead us rather than us attempting to slow its progress. This isn’t to say that these changes won’t take time, but there is tendency out of either fear or the addictive need to control what we don’t know, to inform the progress of change. The problem with this approach is that it isn’t change if we’re in control of it.

We sometimes look at change as this gradual thrust towards something or somewhere. But, what if change was discovered rather than controlled? Rather than constantly trying to control the direction (and yes, there are times when we need to do so) we allow change to lead us?

This is an immanent kind of change that we get to work with but not necessarily manipulate. With these neo-ideologies there is a dependancy upon what is before us rather than what is ahead of us to tell us how we should move forward. This also gives us the power to creatively/forcefully direct its paths because we manipulate what is behind us to a certain extent.

The issue with that is we will only move forward as far as the history of that subject will allow. We are then bound by history rather than informed by the future. This is why we must be careful when introducing things like neo-ideologies, because it is incredibly dependant, almost like the alcoholic is to his beer bottle.

If we continue onto the path of neo-ideologies we will have nothing more than strawmen filling the history books we left behind. I understand this approach is scary especially if we see history as something we are under, part of, or dependant upon. Or history as the Big Other. But, what if history wasn’t any of those things?

We need a new form of history. A new way to see it, address it and live it.

What if history is now? This moment. What if like the ancient eastern religions thought, time was an event, it was when things happened that time was here. What if its an ethic, something we perpetuate out of ourselves into life? If time is an event rather than something that has always been happening, than progress is the event we have been waiting for.

Think of Christ on the Road to Emmaus. Christ who was completely recognizable is now completely unrecognizable. Christ is displaced from Christ. Essentially, the Christ before the Cross no longer exists because this New Christ has been resurrected. Or as one of the early church authors once wrote, ‘the old has gone, the
new has come’.

There is a process of estrangement from our history that needs to occur. Neo-Ideology tries to hold on to a bit of the past and attempts to stretch into the future but can only reach till now because of its direct connection to the past. As long as there is a dependancy upon our past, we will only be able to progress into the now.

How does this help us practically?

I think it speaks into the heart of fear we have become victims to for centuries. It empowers us to paint with a whole new brush with literally endless possibilities. It is a post-structural approach to living life and encountering the Divine. It is a complete 180 degree turn from everything we once knew, so it will challenge us, it will change us. So, I think what it will do, is actually put feet to the idealistic notion when we say ‘I like change’. If we completely change our minds, than we can truly be changed. Like Christ was on the road to Emmaus.