Thursday, December 07, 2006

213: The Response: Shallow or Deep?

I received a cool e-mail from a first time reader. He read this post and decided to write me. I wrote him back and I decided that I wanted to post my e-mail to him. So, without further ado, here's my response:
Hi [___],

Thank you for your thoughtful email. Wow! Your email lifted my spirit.

And by the way, my name is Jake. [___]. It's cool that you found my blog through a comment I left at "[___]."

I feel a bit cathartic now hearing from someone like you who identifies with and understands how I feel. I know I'm not the only person who feels... disappointment, hurt, or whatnot, and it's a great affirmation to hear that I'm not as isolated as I tend to locked myself into thinking.

I know and understand that not all people think alike, that I can't interact with everyone the way I think we should: at a deep level. I get it. Although, like you, I do find it at times difficult to "get it" ...

And your email just reminded me why I was so disappointed with the whole situation with M. You wrote: "So, I know how crappy it can feel when a friend lets you down--especially an important friend." Important friend. When I read it, I had to wonder if I have ever thought of M as an important friend. Immediately, I scoffed, because from the start, M stated that he wanted to separate his work life from his personal life, that he does not want his two worlds colliding. He made it clear that I was a co-worker. But since his declaration, I may have interpreted some of his actions, like him calling me his friend, as something like.., I don't know, him considering me his friend. When in fact, he was calling everyone his friend as Eddie was so prone to do.

And the problem is I've forgotten what I've learned from Eddie. One of the lessons is that I can't always interact with some individual the way I think we should interact. That not all friendships will be deep. As I've written: "In college, I was friends with those who wanted to be my friend. Some of these friendships were shallow and some were deep. Some friendships died off, some grew." I had applied the lesson learned.

But my grief from that night with M stems from the fact that because "M is the first gay man I met outside of blogosphere, a non-virtual gay man, if you will, to whom I've told that I'm gay," I've somehow managed to put him at a different level... perhaps on a pedestal. Hmm, I wonder if I'm making any sense... Because he was the first non-virtual gay man to whom I was truthful in regards to the man I am, maybe I felt that he'd take me by the hand and help me navigate the complex terrains of the gaydom, sans sex. I admit it's an unwarranted expectation. But at the very least, I wanted to learn from him. So, maybe deep down, he was an important person for me. And I will admit, I had once hoped that the word proceeding "important" in the previous sentence had been replaced with the word, "friend," and "was" with "is."

Yes, with M, I've forgotten the lessons of Eddie. I should have let this non-"friendship" with M remain as such, non-existent. I let my lonely heart speak for me, when I should have listened to my clinical mind.

And I do agree with TK's comment and your email: M was being thoughtless; he wasn't trying to be purposely crappy. But I still come to the same conclusion: I'm hurt, not because of M's action, but because of my reaction. And I'm trying not be beat myself up for it. Friendship is like investment. With M, it was an investment without profit. I lost. But I'm trying... no, I won't... no, I'm not beating myself up for it.

Sheesh, I'm sorry for the long-winded reply to your email, [___]. My original purpose was to thank you for letting me know you know how I feel. It means a great lot.

Thank you again,

Jake

No comments: