So Owned

[larkin]

So Owned

by Larkin

I answered the phone. "Hello."

The voice on the other end said, "Who's this?"

I said, "It's Jimi, who's this?"

Then the voice said, "Don't you know who this is? I know who you are."

The voice sounded sort of sly and sneaky but I just couldn't tell. Maybe it was some fake pretending that he knew me.

The voice continued. "So what are you doing?"

I didn't like being fooled and confused at the same time. I said, "Um, where do I know you from?"

The unidentified voice said, "Oh, around."

I said. "Are you sure you mean me?"

He answered. "Yeah, I know who you are."

An image came into my mind. "Wait a minute, are you that kid with the two dogs?"

When he laughed, and said no. That gave him away. I never heard anyone laugh like that before except him. It was the kid I met on the North End on the boardwalk. I met him and went to his house and we.......

"Oh, I know who you are. You're Ricky. How did you find my phone number?"

He instantly became familiar. Ricky answered my question. "It wasn't hard. How many Littlewoods live in Oakhurst? Your Mom or someone answered a few times so I kept trying until you answered."

I was really glad that he called me. When I left his house, I was sure that he written me off as a useless little scrub.

I asked him: "So why'd you call me?"

On the other end there was a pause and then he said, "Oh, I don't know, just bored I guess. I was looking around for you and I was wondering why you didn't show up again. I thought you were a cool little dude."

Well he knew just what to say to make me feel good all over. I didn't think anyone liked me and then, I meet this older kid and he says all these nice things about me. Unfortunately, his complements got me all tongue tied, making me sound so stupid on the phone.

He asked again: "So how come you didn't come back?"

I stumbled on my words, "I, I don't know."

He continued, "Why don't you come over and we could hang out?

I said, "I don't know?"

He wasn't satisfied with my answer. "Oh, I know, you think I'm an asshole and you didn't have the balls to tell me to my face, right?"

I hadn't given him any reason for him to think that. "No, no way, I thought you the coolest. I just figured that you thought I was a wimp. Honest, Ricky!"

"Would I be calling you if I thought you were a wimp, which you are anyway. I called you because I liked you."

He laughed again. "Oh, I know, you got all scared of me because I got all physical with you. That doesn't mean that I'm gay, ya know."

I know it sounds stupid but I had pushed that incident to the back of my mind until he brought it up. "I didn't think that you were gay, it was just a surprise, I mean, it didn't bother me or anything."

Just talking to him and talking about what we did began to fill me with the strange impulsive excitement that I had felt when I was there. He was holding me and was all over me and I was sure something intense was going to happen and maybe I wanted it to.

The tone of his voice was serious. "So, are you sayin that because of that, you don't want to come over and hang with me?"

He put me on the defensive. "No, Ricky, I want to come over. Honest."

He said, "Oh, ok, so if I let you come over, I have to be all polite and not do anything dirty like you're a girl, which you look like anyway, well just forget it!"

I was still on the defensive. "Ricky, I don't care, honest. If you let me come over, you can do anything you want and it's not going to bother me, I promise."

He was still testy. "Well, considering it's my room, I will, thank you very much! Shit, I'm all nice to you and make you my best bud and then you act all snotty like you're a little bitch. I got other friends, ya know."

All I could say was "I'm sorry", but for what, I didn't know.

He quickly said, "Hey Jimi, I just get pissed off for no reason sometimes. Listen, I really want you to come over. You and me could have a good time just playing around."

I said, "When can I come over?"

Ricky answered "How about now?"

[Bruin Fisher]

Interesting piece - wasn't entirely sure how to take it at first. The title helped.

I guess the one thing that 'ends' in this piece is any uncertainty as to whether the protagonist is 'owned' - by the end it's clear he'll do anything the older guy says. That is very well conveyed.

[colinian]

A story about a victim and his controller, and unfortunately often a true story.

Colin

[larkin]

A story about a victim and his controller, and unfortunately often a true story.

Colin

All due respect, but that is an unfortunate perspective and you've a right to it.

Not all relationships are initiated on the basis of conventional romance. And if you look closely, even conventional romance has its own set of coercive dynamics.

Being gay should not always mean mimicking heterosexual values. That would be my perspective.

[colinian]

All due respect, but that is an unfortunate perspective and you've a right to it.

Not all relationships are initiated on the basis of conventional romance. And if you look closely, even conventional romance has its own set of coercive dynamics.

Being gay should not always mean mimicking heterosexual values. That would be my perspective.

My perspective is that any relationship I would want to be party to is one with no coercive dynamics. That certainly describes the relationship my spouse Doug and I have with each other. I don't think that means we're mimicking any set of values other than our own.

Colin

[Bruin Fisher]

I too read the relationship as to some extent abusive. And, like Colin, I wouldn't want to be in any relationship that wasn't grounded in equality and respect. I know there's a whole scene, BDSM, where people feel fulfilled by giving up that equality and being 'owned' by another. That's fine for them if they're safe. But it's not me. I have never thought that means I conform to heterosexual values, though!

[larkin]

Bruin, there is an entire story that goes with this piece and was it intensely sexual but in no way abusive or BDSM. It was by choice and did not extend beyond mutual JO. which is common place among boys.

Two people going down the path together is a noble ideal, but the truth is that it is usually one or the other that leads the way. As a writer, should I stick to the ideal or should I tell the truth?

In real life this phone call may have been not much more than 50 words and boring at that. I expanded for the sake of literary expression by adding the subtext.

From Colinian: My perspective is that any relationship I would want to be party to is one with no coercive dynamics. That certainly describes the relationship my spouse Doug and I have with each other. I don't think that means we're mimicking any set of values other than our own.

Colinian, I don't think that is possible. Every relationship, sexual or otherwise, has coercive elements that are subject to negotiation.

It not my object to judge anyone else but only to defend my story.

[Bruin Fisher]

Ah I did wonder if there was a longer story around this episode. It would be interesting to see how the whole story fleshes out the characters and their relationship.

Just from the flash we have here, the older boy comes across as 'sly and sneaky' as the protagonist describes.

It probably is true that most (many?) relationships do develop with one party leading the way, but if they respect their inamorato they will take great care to lead at a pace and to a goal that is amicable to him or her.

Sorry, Larkin, I am impressed with your writing but not happy with the idea that all relationships have a coercive element. I wouldn't want to be in such a relationship, and I understand if Colin, for instance, is discomforted by the implication that his relationship is so.

Coerce - persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats.

[Cole Parker]

Of course in any relationship there will be times when coercion occurs. I don't think that means it's a coercive relationship. It's just that life if complicated and relationships even more so. In any lasting relationship, someone will have the upper hand in some situations, the other in others. That only makes sense because the two people will have different strengths. But for a good relationship, both people have to have independence and not be utterly dependent on the other, and neither should be subservient. If that's the case, it isn't a normal relationship and would be offensive and short-lived for most people.

[larkin]

Of course in any relationship there will be times when coercion occurs. I don't think that means it's a coercive relationship. It's just that life if complicated and relationships even more so. In any lasting relationship, someone will have the upper hand in some situations, the other in others. That only makes sense because the two people will have different strengths. But for a good relationship, both people have to have independence and not be utterly dependent on the other, and neither should be subservient. If that's the case, it isn't a normal relationship and would be offensive and short-lived for most people.

Hi Cole,

All that you say may be true but you are speaking of an ideal. Unfortunately, lasting relationships aren't usually the norm and even less so concerning male/male relationships.

I applaud gay marriage but it will not change the dynamic between gay men. Every homosexual encounter is not motivated by romance or does it lead to a lasting relationship, nor should it.

I meant this story to be humorous male banter not an indictment of casual sex. If you chose to view it in that light then that is your prerogative.

Perhaps I am supporting an unpopular point of view but are you suggesting that I don't write about it and that I get with the program?

[Cole Parker]

Not at all! You should write what you want. I was merely responding to the remarks others have made on this topic.

Should we strive for the ideals? I think so. I think it's a shame that so many heterosexual marriages end in divorce, and hope with the universal advent of gay marriages, we can change the statistics. Certainly the fact gays weren't allowed to marry in the past affected the length of gay relationships then. I hope with the new legality of gay marriage, many of our relationships will last longer, and I think that's good. Especially where raising children is concerned. I also think it'll be ironic if gay marriages become the model, which they can if they last longer than straight marriages.

I see nothing wrong with looking on the sunny side.

C

[larkin]

Thank you Cole

[larkin]

Guess what?

I am conceding to my detractors.

To Cole, Bruin and even, Colinian. I re-read the piece and made a change. It shows you the power of one word or one punctuation mark.

It was a mistake on my part and I didn't see it at the time but I have gone back and edited it. The exclamation mark at the very end of the piece made the tone harsh and unforgiving. That was not my intention. So, essentially you guys are right.

Without the exclamation mark, it becomes more like an encouragement to enter into a conspiracy whereby the character has a choice.

[FreeThinker]

I don't think I would use the word "detractors." This is simply a discussion, sort of like the creative writing classes some of us have taken in which we read each other's writing and comment. I enjoy the back and forth about different stories and I find it very helpful to get a variety of points of view.

[larkin]

I have been to a lot of straight writers sites and they are brutal. They will tear you apart on technicalities and don't always have a tolerance for queer themes. They really are partial to commercial and formulaic writing.

Perhaps I was being defensive but I always do my best to maintain civility