In which we try to avoid talk of pornography

The church has various social groups, one of which is called "SipNSup."  8 people get together at the host home for a potluck.  The idea is to make connections and meet new people, so the people who sign up for the group are rotated around, as are the hosts.  D signed us up, and we attended our first event last night.

Our hosts lived in a gorgeous new home in Placitas, a small town 10 miles north of Albuquerque, 5 miles to the east of Highway 25.  This is an area we have already investigated:  in addition to the original town there are open spaces and several developments in the surrounding hills.  The views of the Jemez and Sandia mountains are stunning, and the homes are, for the most part, xeriscaped and reasonably separated.  They are also square stucco mansions, fairly uniform in design.

Most homes are, of course, out of our price range, and living there would add a 20-minute one-way free-way commute to the daily routine.  But the stars and views and the peace might be worth it.

So, there we were, sitting in a circle around the kiva fireplace, looking out the westward-facing windows at glowing orange-pink sunset clouds, watching hummingbirds darting around the house. The conversation was socially apt:  we shared life histories (DN was from Alabama, had lived in NM 4 times and traveled the world as an engineer, V was from Texas and had volunteered with the Peace Corps in Guatemala, our hosts had lived in Placitas for 2 years, L had done her research on why rural doctors stayed in their small communities, B had unsuccessfully run for Congress and traveled to China to sell airplanes, DY had worked for a non-profit in Flint, Michigan.)  D, DN, and I were the only non-retirees in the group.

Eventually we gathered around the table, a beautiful round wooden antiqued surface with a glass lazy susan and a dried Hawaiian flower centerpiece.  We talked about Unitarianism, Buddhism, atheism, the Democratic convention, books, music, movies, Antarctica, travels, cats....the usual.  Then, B (who is seated to my right) took over.  He had already exhibited signs of social ineptitude, dropping names that few of us recognized, talking obliquely and at random length about his life history: "I am winning my fight over OCD and bi-polarism, I was knocked off the ballot, I have much life experience and was the best qualified person for the job...."

Now he breaks into our general discussion..."I have been talking to Christine (the minister) and she is not answering my calls, but I want to know what you think about our fellow Unitarian who lives just a few miles from this very house and who has a different story to tell than the newspapers tell, I have visited him, he is a good man, a teacher who wants to be a writer and is gathering images, doing research for a Silence of the Lambs sort of book...."  There's a rustle of discomfort and DY mutters, "Oh, the pornographer," while B continues to ramble on.  Our host, L, says, "I have worked with children as a social worker, I cannot discuss this man's situation dispassionately."  B talks on.  I look across at DN:  he is staring down at his plate.  I look at V:  his gnome-like face has lost its smile and he is staring up at the ceiling.  D is uncharacteristically silent, for which I am grateful:  I can see in his face that he is seething.  I say, "I think it's clear that this group would prefer to not discuss this topic.  We are willing to trust in the judicial process, and while we may appreciate that compassion that leads you to reach out to this man, it's an emotional topic and we should not pursue it."  He talks on about OCD, Congress, politics, being bipolar, the discomfort on our faces and V finally loses it:  "What point are you trying to make?"

Somehow, I'm not sure how, we wrench the conversation back to neutral topics.  There's a short pause and B starts in again, not mentioning the pornographer directly, but musing about what this evening is showing about us, and referring again to his political past and life experience.  DN goes to the restroom.  Our host, to my left, leans forward.  His cat has been sitting in his lap through much of the dinner.  Petting his cat calmly he says, "Your experience means nothing to the collective experience around this table, we don't want to hear this."

B gets up and leaves.  I think he's going outside to cool off.  Our host follows him to the door to turn on lights.  The rest of us begin talking about the convention again, and our host returns.  Settling into his chair he says, "Well, we've made history.  We have hosted this event 5 times, and this is the first time someone has abandoned ship."   And we begin discussing what had happened.  Apparently DY and V have attended 4 other SipNSups with him, and he has behaved the same at all of them.  DY had actually called the organizers when she saw his name, and they had offered to move them to another group.  Uh, what about moving him?

But I'm wondering:  was it perhaps good to have someone outrageous in the group for the rest of us to bond over?  And, was his behavior really so innocent?  While I chose to pretend he was sincerely concerned about the pornographer, and that he just couldn't pick up on the social cues, I don't really believe it.  I think he was deliberately introducing discomfort into the gathering to see how we'd respond, and I think he enjoyed the results of his social experiment.

In a way, so did I.

So, the night wound on.  When we left, we could see the Milky Way.