your blood is your blood

if something is said to be beautiful, then it is bound to be ultimately good, correct? it’s been recycled over and over, that famous retelling. that being the case, it would be also true that all which is ugly is monstrous, and all which is pleasing to view is, well, good. but once you look more into it, it really isn’t the case, is it? a monster rarely approaches you with violence, vigor and a stagnant baring of incisors. but more-so it caresses you, coaxes you into taking the first step towards it, maybe to absolve itself of blame.

a monster, often, is truly the offspring of an environment bound in certain shackles or chains of some sort. it is never first nature, why would it be? when someone is first presented to the world, or at least when they can first concoct some coherent thought, is their first thought to harm the world? destroy it? granted, there are some cases where that might be true but, i don’t think that goes for everything.