This episode is a bit long, I think. But lots of interesting conversation. Eventually. If you’re one of us. Or Dave of Id. So… well, the title’s pretty intriguing, right? Enjoy!
QUESTIONS:
**Indicates abridged version of summarized question
**William always says “my wife” instead of his wife’s name. What’s that all about? –Mark McKibben
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
I have to say, Zoom makes me miss quite a lot that goes on in these conversations, stuff that I only pick up when I listen later. Which is annoying. But, to be fair, I often missed things in the conversation when we recorded in the same room, so…
A couple points I tried to make that I don’t think got made… apologies for the long and boring of it:
My main concern with Abby has always been, and is today, that she and I understand what our relationship is. Which, even when that understanding wasn’t perfect, nobody else ever understood it better than we did. However anyone else would view it, or however it would be viewed by “conventional cultural standards”, that was all perfectly irrelevant to us. And it still is. In fact, I wouldn’t say that words like “married” and “wife” and “husband” really clarify much for others what our relationship is like, given the cultural standards applied to these words in the US today (at least, as far as I understand those cultural standards).
Which is to say that I’ve pretty-much never had words adequate to describe our relationship. When certain conventional words seemed to be “good enough”, I would use them where appropriate.
Fortunately for me, though, I didn’t have to worry about that much, because there was almost never a “where appropriate”. I didn’t grow up in a culture where people talked about their significant others, really. In fact, where I grew up, if a person talked about their significant other often, especially if in ways that might be considered “fawning”, it was perceived with suspicion. Now, people sometimes did talk about what a particular couple was up to, if they even were a couple, etc., but this kind of talk was considered gossip, and gossip wasn’t regarded as respectable behavior.
Because, another feature of the culture I came from, speaking about people not present (outside of practical reasons) was generally considered rude. If you were saying something nice about the person it might be allowed, but the real question was, how *personal* was the information. It might compliment Jane to tell others of some act of charity that she performed, for example, but if Jane sees this act as one of humility and *personal* kindness, it would be wrong to mar her spiritual act with a fame she didn’t crave. And since amorous relationships are always very personal for all of the parties involved, and it’s difficult for one party in such a relationship to know just what the other party or parties would be comfortable having discussed, the most respectful thing seemed to be for all parties to only speak of their relationship with each other and reveal to other parties only what they “need to know” (such as, “we’re married”, since that is a legally defined thing with legal implications).
Which brings us to what I understood was the point of the whole conversation (although, upon watching later, I noticed that it seemed to drift to other questions, but hopefully I’ve addressed those), which is, what are the specifics as to who “needs to know”, when they “need to know”, and what they “need to know”? Where I come from, nobody *needs* to know anything ever. And if they think they do, that’s their problem, really, and they ought to learn to mind their own business. Now, it’s true that for the past 33 years I’ve lived in a culture that thinks it needs to know certain things. To make it perfectly clear, I have never believed, and I do not believe now, that anybody *needs* to know anything ever. I do feel obligated, as Tony suggested, to understand the conventions of the culture I live in, but, first of all, that’s an obligation I take on voluntarily — I don’t have to do it — and, second of all, while I do want to understand those conventions I feel under no obligation whatsoever to conform to them, especially where I think they’re untenable. I don’t want to offend people and I do want to take whatever reasonable steps I can not to offend people and I’m perfectly happy to make amends with someone I’ve offended if it’s clear to me that I’m in the wrong, but, all of that said, sometimes a person’s offense is entirely on them, particularly when they’re offended that I don’t conform to a cultural norm that I find ridiculous, and the only thing I can do for such person is encourage them to get over it and maybe learn to mind their own business.
It was suggested that this way of approaching life makes things difficult for me, and sometimes it does. But the operative term here is “sometimes”. I’d much rather have a difficult time *occasionally* because of relatively infrequent gaffes than subject myself to unreasonable social/cultural pressure *constantly*. I think the result is that I experience less difficulty, overall, than other folks.
My chief complaint with the treatment of amorous relationships in my current culture is the sense of ownership that it seems to entail. Why is “dating status” a thing that everyone seems to feel entitled to know? Because people want to know if you’re already “taken” or “on the market”, and they want to know if they should or should not feel free to construe certain behavior as “shopping around” (flirting, etc.). Which touches on another thing that bothers me a bit, which is that there seems to be no place in the culture where “shopping around” isn’t expected. Work, church, on the bus… it’s like the whole world is a singles bar, especially to men, but to most women I’ve known also. Sometimes it feels like “coupling” undergirds everything in modern life. And I find that very annoying.
Anyway… that’s an embarrassingly long rant, but I spent all of this time typing it, so I might as well enter it! 😀
Who the heck is Abby?
It’s code. Don’t worry about it.
I think the reality is that most people’s relationships don’t fit the cultural standards. Not that culture doesn’t have an impact, but the standard is too uniform. I think this results in lots of people having insecurities about their relationships. And that dynamic between having a standardized view of what is normal and feeling insecure when one isn’t “normal” is very much part of being in a consumer culture. It’s what’s behind the drive to constantly be shopping.
I think another problem with trying to represent other people is how inaccurate we can be. I mean I’m not always that great at representing who I am; think about how that increases when I’m trying to represent someone else!
Yes, those are excellent points!
🙂
Very good points. There are aspects of my relationship with Trish that are, I think, unusual. Or at least, presented in our culture as unusual. We’ve discussed them, and are happy with our relationship, and love each other dearly. But I don’t, generally, mention those aspects, out of insecurity over others judging me. So… good point!
Yes, those are excellent points!
🙂
Just noticed that this posted twice… and I have no idea why…
Not wanting to take away from what was a very interesting discussion but was the thing you wanted to talk about exploding head syndrome?
Right? We keep forgetting! We forgot this week, too…
William doesn’t actually think it’s that interesting. But, as you might guess, William is wrong. 🙂
I think I’m a fairly good cook, but I also struggle with getting stuff to simmer and stay simmering.
Me too, and I THINK that I found something that works. Unfortunately, it’s not the most convenient way. I find that it’s much much easier to keep a large amount simmering than a small amount, which makes sense scientifically. But I have never tried it until I was making whole bags of rice and black-eyed peas for New Years Day. Both times, I was able to simply get it boiling and turn it to it’s lowest setting for 20 minutes and an hour, respectively.