It's like someone's paying teo to nay say everything in comment #1. She's totally fun! Possibly m-fun!
On a group blog, pacing is your friend.
4: I'll have you know I held off on this until Becks' recent post got to 40 comments plus someone (ned?) has advocated a preference for at least two active threads, a preference which I at some point sort of adopted, plus she's great! plus plus plus.
I'll admit to like her videos.
But, I like the S/me T Favs too, so I am hardly an example to follow.
Between around 0:10 and 0:20 it sounds kind of like "Locomotive Breath".
Wow, she really has the Cute Girl act down. I am in love. Er, well, I would be, if I were 20 years younger and unmarried. Instead, I will take a paternal attitude:
The cute girl act will only take you so far, young lady. You need to buckle down with that computer science class. You need a marketable skill. Don't let youtube fame go to your head. But you should know that your mother and I support you whatever you do.
Stanley:
See if you can get your friend to sing Aqualung.
5: So you're neb's bitch, is that it? Carry on.
She's pretty charming, but I think I've reached my listening quota with that song.
2: Teo's on record as saying he doesn't like music! Don't listen to him.
(I haven't watched, and probably won't watch.)
If you'd rather talk about something else, you could counsel me on what to do with two close married-to-each-other friends who might be headed towards divorce. Basically, the guy realized after seven years of marriage that he's not sure he ever really loved her, and a whole shit show has ensued. The only advice I've received so far is: stay far the fuck away from the situation.
I decided against an Ask the Mineshaft on this question because one of the two involved does read the main page occasionally but never the comments (weird, right?).
Cute, but, um, I can listen to my friends babble just as charmingly.
Stanley, if only you knew a divorce lawyer whose card you could give to the spouse with more money.....
Someone who might buy you a veggie burger when you are wandering the streets.
14: Yes, but do they get right up in the camera and make their eyes real big and smile like that? Acting cute on camera is definitely a skill that is not evenly distributed across the population.
And the people who do it well make it look so easily! After watching Dr. Horrible, I was convinced I could do the same puppy dog eyebrow things that Neil P. Harris did. I spent at least an hour in front of the mirror. That stuff is actually hard.
16: No money here, will, sorry. I don't think these friends could even afford a lawyer.
10: Yes! I haven't watched the Julia Nunes video, but the cute girl should try to do Jethro Tull. How about Skating Away (if it's even called that)?
You've already gotten the only useful advice, Stanley.
17: I have at least one friend who will do that exact same eye thing - on camera and in person. She is adorable, yes.
BUT! Few of my friends can sing, so, she's got that going for her.
Witt means that the girl should sing Aqualung.
She's not good enough for you, Stanley. And in terms of your friends, decide which one you care about more, and give that person lots of support. If you can manage to remain on speaking terms with the other one too, well, that's a bonus.
Have they tried counseling, Stanley? (Do they have health benefits that would cover counseling, is an important related question.) Not that it's necessarily effective, but after seven years, it might be worth the effort.
Oh, also, they don't call it "the seven year itch" for no reason. Seriously, that's a major point of stress in many long-term relationships. Which isn't in any way an attempt to belittle your friend's sense that he never loved his wife. That happens. Or at least it did to good friends of mine.
I updated the post with this one as a better example, fyi.
Have they tried counseling, Stanley?
That's what they're doing now. We'll see. It doesn't make it easier that I live with the couple.
Plus, I'm just saying, she's got that your-goofy-best-friend-vibe thing going. I'm not talking romance. Perv.
"Perv"
I'm not the one posting the videos. Also, I don't have speakers (toddler with a love youtube and no self-control), so I may be missing the vibe.
13: Basically, the guy realized after seven years of marriage that he's not sure he ever really loved her, and a whole shit show has ensued. The only advice I've received so far is: stay far the fuck away from the situation.
I think Witt is basically correct. This is not a situation you can help much with. I will say that the whole 'I'm not sure I ever really loved her' thing is kinda... douchey. It might be true, but that's worse than 'I thought I loved this person, but you're really not that person' or even maybe 'I really loved you in a shallow and stupid kind of way, but now you've changed and it sucks to be with you'. If it's true, they should split up and there you go. If it isn't true, and he's just looking for an out, well, they should split up. In any event, 'I never really loved her' is your cue to stay the fuck out of it.
Hrmmm: basically
max
['All else is commentary.']
Okay, the video in 26 gives a better sense of her appeal. Still meh, though.
34: It's a trick. Any statement is true for a member of the empty set.
Don't be stupid, Walt. There are no members of the empty set.
13: You could try to hit on the woman on the grounds that might either make her husband jealous enough to work on the marriage or, if not, get you a shot with a divorcee. On the other hand, that could lead to some sort of giant police stand-off or something. So, I'd go with stay-away also.
28: That's what they're doing now. We'll see. It doesn't make it easier that I live with the couple.
So these are the apocalyptic Randroids goldbugs with the canned water and the end of the world lit? I think your problem here isn't what you should do to help, your problem here is finding another place to live, preferably with less insane people.
max
['This sort of thing never ends well.']
It has just occurred to me, in the context of wondering about nosflow's best friend and what such a rank might entail, that my three current best friends might not even get along, but they're far flung so no worries. Still: that's weird to me.
"preferably with less insane people."
Talk about an empty set.
Chuck Norris is a member of the empty set.
The empty set was full before Chuck Norris got there.
your problem here is finding another place to live, preferably with less insane people.
The problem there is, I've painted an accurate political description of them here and I'm sort of sorry for it. They're my friends. We take the garbage out together. I get pulled off to the porch till 4am by one or the other to talk. And moving out wouldn't solve it for me, it would make it worse. They'd probably ask me to cover some money for 'em anyway. Plus, I dunno. They're my friends. They look out for me in the neighborhood. I don't know how else to explain it other than saying, yeah, they've got some fucked-up political and eschatological beliefs. But we're friends. And it sucks that this is happening.
Most eschatalogical beliefs are kind of fucked up.
44: I have no advice on the break-up, but I know exactly what you mean when it comes to being friends despite a divide in political and religious beliefs. In college, many of my friends were conservative evangelicals. (I chose the wrong school). They were my friends, compassionate people who I disagreed with vehemently on a number of issues, but were still, when it came down to it, my friends. Anyway, sympathy. Best of luck to them both.
Every marriage goes through really crap periods and bad times pass. Related, I'm guessing that, in general, it isn't the 'married for 7 years' thing that is the problem, it is the 'Holy crap I'm past 30 and don't know what to do with life' thing.
Chuck Norris contains the set of all sets that do not contain themselves.
The set of sets that do not contain themselves includes the twin sets that this woman I used to work with wore.
Am I the only one who feels sort of uncomfortably voyeuristic watching someone babble into a camera?
52: No. I felt bad for Admiral Stockdale also.
Am I the only one who feels sort of uncomfortably voyeuristic watching someone babble into a camera?
Nope. And the discomfort makes me feel old. If I were truly of Generation Y I wouldn't be, right?
We know, given 32, that nosflow's best friend is not Chuck Norris.
52: That's among the reasons I don't watch TV.
55.1:But it might be Pluto, or Uranus.
Hey remember how I said I was going to rewrite the unfoggedbot in ruby using xmpp?
And then you found five dollars.
Speaking of not being Gen Y, why am I the only (American) person under 50 who drinks port?
why am I the only (American) person under 50 who drinks port?
So you were the Resident Head of my dorm my last two years of college? Awesome!
It's almost working.
And always will be.
61: Ruby or tawny? (It better not be tawny.)
So I'm not the only one. I'm thinking maybe the reason I don't see anybody drink it is because it is a bad alcohol/$ value as priced in most bars.
And always will be.
Ho ho ho.
I seemed to have to go out of my way to get tracebacks when exceptions occurred in threads.
65: It's red and wasn't perched on the hood of White Snake's sport car. So I'm guessing ruby, but it didn't say. It was just labeled 'port'.
But things seem pretty good at this point?
E.g. I finally got HTML formatting through.
ø ç
Some (American) people under 50 make Port. Or a Port-style wine, if you want to be picky about it.
Sure didn't like those characters, though. Perhaps this is a db issue.
66: It would never occur to me to order it in a bar, but I certainly see it on a lot of dessert menus at restaurants. I happen to love the stuff, but don't get the chance to drink it very often.
74: If my own experience serves as any guide, yes, and they find it surprisingly good.
I have to say, of anything I've every purchased for less than $10/bottle, port is the best. I'll try sherry next week.
Indeed, it was caused by the trip through the db.
I just got summoned from my room to learn that the couple is splitsville officially. It was all very calm but weird. Gah, marriage is stupid.
OT: I want these kids to do all my errands for me.
79: Sorry to hear that. Depending on time zone, maybe they should sleep on it.
I'd rather have a bottle of port in front of me than a portal into phlebotomy.
44: The problem there is, I've painted an accurate political description of them here and I'm sort of sorry for it.
I was less bothered by their beliefs (because I've known plenty of both right wingers and weird DFHs New Agers and liked them well enough) than I was bothered by the fact that they seemed like the type of people to say things (through a megaphone) like, 'We're turning the bathroom into a bomb shelter, can you not pee for six months?'
We take the garbage out together. I get pulled off to the porch till 4am by one or the other to talk. And moving out wouldn't solve it for me, it would make it worse. They'd probably ask me to cover some money for 'em anyway.
Stanley has adopted a family of strays (or is it the other way around?).
And it sucks that this is happening.
Sure. It would suck even if you didn't leave with them. Unfortunately, since you do live with them, you are a non-neutral. It would take the skills of a professional mediator to 'solve' the problem such that one or the other did not eventually wind up hating you, and you would be doing that by manipulating them into adopting your preferred outcome. In any event, you will wind up triangulated in this situation (because you already ARE triangulated), and that makes you (in this case) part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.
(Seriously) They may need to split up. They may need to work things out. Couldn't fuckin' tell ya. But the counselor (who IS neutral) is the one they're paying to handle this, and you should let that person do their job. That's the only place a solution that keeps them together is going to appear from that isn't bad for one or both of them.
It sucks, but you're kinda gonna haveta prepare yourself for the event that they do split. But you really need to stay out of it, even though it sucks, because your interference would just exacerbate the situation. You're just gonna have to be a good friend and hope it works out well.
max
['There are various situations I could think of where you probably should interfere, but those situations involve things like addiction and abuse and crap.']
81: It = the wet spot? You know, like from crying.
79: Gah, marriage is stupid.
Maybe they just had the wrong photographer at their wedding.
Take my picture ... please.
83: You're right. I'm happy to be headed out-of-town for a week and a half. I hope they sort shit out for when I come back.
Did they tell you who gets custody of Stanley? That seems like the most important question to me.
Well, one of them gets to keep you, right? Which one?
The guy, Hambone, seems to be staying, but it's all sort of up-in-the-air.
Maybe he means like this, Stanley. Don't want to make light, though; sucks for all of you.
91: I'm happy to have people make light. That's pretty much why I'm here on this issue; it's a month old as an issue, but it came to a head tonight.
On the original post: she's adorable, of course. And talented and fun.
She's no Gugug, though.
Well, she's no Jake Shimabukuro, either.
Between the three of them we've got a pretty decent game of rock-paper-scissors.
A game I will confound with the introduction of Loudon Wainwright III.
But can just one man match the maginificent seven?
("Maginificent" means "ever more magnificent than you're used to.")
20 is exactly right. That said, when I went through my divorce, it was helpful to talk to my friend L, who didn't take sides. I could talk to her and get a candid and informed opinion about Wrongshore Wife I. Her partner J, to whom I was closer, took my side, and while comforting, it wasn't as useful.
L. didn't really tell tales on each of us to one another -- she just knew what we were talking about when we talked about the other. She's still friends with both of us. It's a hard needle to thread.
I'm supporting Stanley in his Julia Nunes love. This video always makes me so happy. Sure she's not brilliant, but that is so not the point.
It truly is a hard needle to thread. If there's a lot of anger between them, remaining friends with both could prove impossible.
A month doesn't seem like a very long time for really working on it. But then, living together with a rockstar also seems less than optimal for marriage. Maybe a little time apart will do them good.
Stay out of it, in the 'don't take sides' sense, is probably the best possible advice. With friends, though, I'd have a hard time not trying to probe him to figure out what on earth "not sure he ever really loved her" means. Is he unhappy being married to her, or is he just speculating that there's something more sparkly out there someplace. Also, if it were me, I'd have a hard time not deciding (in my own head, not for public consumption) if I were rooting for a quick and hopefully painless end to the marriage, or if I were hoping they'd get through it.
I don't think that the sentiment of "Did I ever really love her/him?" is that uncommon. Once it is over, it can be difficult to remember whether it was love or convenience.
Also, I agree with ari about the 7 year itch. It is a tough period of time for a lot of marriages.
Yeah, I can see it as a common thought; I'm just wondering whether it would be better rephrased as "Is this kind of vaguely contented relationship all there is out there? Shouldn't there be more passion and intensity?" or "How could I ever have thought I loved this person who I don't even like?" Boredom, or distaste?
stress (money, jobs, kids), boredom.
Plus, after 7 years, you are typically in a different stage of life and that transition can send the two of you in different directions.
I vote that Stanley offer to mediate their dispute and repair their relationship.
It is a tough period of time for a lot of marriages
Or, as Will likes to call it, "a window of opportunity."
I'm just wondering whether it would be better rephrased as "Is this kind of vaguely contented relationship all there is out there? Shouldn't there be more passion and intensity?" or "How could I ever have thought I loved this person who I don't even like?"
I am certain that it could be better phrased. Language is important and can be terribly hurtful.
But, when someone is in the midst of a divorce, they can hardly be expected to speak with clarity when they often have ten different emotions swirling through their head at the same time. Shame, frustration, regret, excitement, anger, sadness, etc.
Wrongshore has a good point. In any traumatic situation like this, it can help people to have a friend to talk to/vent at who won't try and "fix" it, just listen.
Living with them could make this pretty hard to pull off though. I've twice now been in a situation where both partners in a collapsing relationship wanted this role out of me, which is pretty hard to balance too. I guess that's an extension of the `people just talk to me' thing that seems to happen.
I've said before that I am an advocate of 7 year marriages. It forces both people to evaluate whether they want to stay and whether the other person wants to stay.
Soup:
But, you will keep that part about my crush on LB a secret, right?
Oh, Will, you know our feelings for each other aren't the kind of thing that can be concealed, right?
We would have to have a permit to keep our feelings concealed.
But with a permit in one state, could carry them across state lines, right?
But not on college campuses, except in Texas.
Wrongshore has a good point. In any traumatic situation like this, it can help people to have a friend to talk to/vent at who won't try and "fix" it, just listen.
True, but Stanley needs to look after himself as well. I've seen people who have been piggy in the middle in this sort of situation who've ended up being more traumatised than the protagonists. If you find yourself in a position where you're being asked for more than you can give at that point in time, no blame attaches, you just have to take a time out.
115: Yes, that's why I noted that in his case (living with them) it could be hard to pull off. Very situational, that stuff.
If you find yourself in a position where you're being asked for more than you can give at that point in time, no blame attaches, you just have to take a time out.
This is a tricky thing to pull off, too, though. "No blame attaches" may very well not be the response of the person from whom you decide to take a time out. Abandonment issues are, perhaps unsurprisingly, on a bit of a hair-trigger in the midst of a divorce.
So what's going to happen to their compost heap?!?!?
I'd advise that emotional stress should be channeled in to compulsive turning of the heap. It'll speed up decomposition.
This is a tricky thing to pull off, too, though.
No shit, Sherlock. But ultimately self-preservation has to be your priority. Sorry if this sounds brutal, but what good is Stanley going to be to his friends if he's a quivering wreck himself?
120: They could eat him after the apocalypse. Friends are an under appreciated source of protein.
No shit, Sherlock.
Yep, that did in fact sound brutal. I wasn't disagreeing that Stanley needs to take care of himself, just making clear that he can't assume "no blame attaches." You may need to walk away for self-preservation -- but if you are going to do so, be well-aware that you may not get the opportunity to come back. If you walk away thinking it's just "a time out" you may be very surprised to discover that, no, in fact that was just "game over."
I'd advise that emotional stress should be channeled in to compulsive turning of the heap. It'll speed up decomposition.
Indeed, stirring up piles of festering garbage is a pretty common part of the process.
I've got two very close friends who are going through this weird time right now when their partners (one an 8-year relationship, the other a 12-year one in which they are married) are saying they want to leave for a "trial separation" for a few months, but it's pretty obvious that they really just want to break the whole thing off. My friends in these situations are having a really hard time because they don't know whether their partners are wooable or not--both of them want to stay in their relationships. And both of them say if it's definitely over, they'd rather be told that so they can decide whether to start mourning the relationship.
I don't know what will happen to either, but it's sad to watch my friends try to figure out how to convince their partners to stay when any such convincing seems exactly what will make them sure to leave. If someone wants time away, the only thing one can do, I guess, is give it to them.
I have a fairly small sample to work from, but I can't think of any marriage I've known where either a trial separation or counseling with the idea of exploring whether or not the marriage can be preserved hasn't led to divorce (well, my parents stayed together for quite a while after doing both, but eventually split up and Jesus Christ would they have been better off if they'd gotten off the dime faster). I've seen marriages that seem unhappy get happier, but not ones that had moved to formal action on the unhappiness.
I could be overgeneralizing here, but I'd hear "trial separation" as "definitely over".
Weirdly, I can sort of see there being a chance of reconciliation if both partners are unhappy with the relationship as it is because they both have the desire for the relationship to change. But in both cases, my friends are happy with the way things are and their partners are not. You really can't convince someone who's unhappy in a relationship that they are actually happy and enjoy it a great deal and that change would be bad.
My escape from BOGF began as a supposed trial separation (her idea).
It's not actually clear to me whether this was before or after she started dating a guy from work. Either way, thanks, guy from work!
I think IME "trial separation" is 100% likely to progress to divorce. I can't think of any exceptions that I've seen. I don't doubt that people do a lot of informal leaving and reconciling, but every single relationship I've been around that announced a "trial separation" went into divorce.
That said, trial separations themselves are really varied. Sometimes it seems like a good winding-down period for both parties, and other times like a really manipulative, awful way for one party to pretend to be acting in good faith but really have no interest or willingness to continue the relationship -- just keep dragging things out for financial/health insurance/other reasons.
I could be overgeneralizing here, but I'd hear "trial separation" as "definitely over".
That's certainly how UNG heard it, so it never happened. In my mind, if I could just have gotten a little space apart to clear my head and get a little rest from the constant emotional turmoil, maybe we could have talked things through differently. Who knows if it would have made anything any different, but I knew there was no way anything would recover living in the constant state of war.
I do know two couples who seemed to survive marriage counseling intact. Of course, the one emailed a week or so ago that she needs to found a marriage counselor again -- things are bad. And in the other he is (or at least recently was) having an affair. Oh, and I guess my parents went through counseling and are still together. Of course, they should get off the damn dime -- maybe LB's folks could sit them down and have a talk.
re: 128
Some friends of mine moved apart after they'd been living together for a couple of years. It was an experiment in giving each other more space and a trial separation in all but name. I think we all assumed they'd end up splitting up. They ended up getting married and are still happily together 5 years later.
But yeah, as a general rule, you're probably right.
130: Ha, it's funny to see a UK-er in this thread. Just as I typed "health insurance" in 128 I was thinking, "And in a minute one of the Brits is going to come along and marvel again at the insanity that is created by US health care policy."
Yeah, my guess is that both of these relationships are over. But I feel like such an asshole while counseling my friends about it, saying maybe it's not the best idea to invite the partner on a romantic date to try to get them to realize how much they'll miss being together. They still have hope, even though both of them admit that they realize their partners are probably gone for good. The trial separation thing seems unnecessarily cruel in that situation, though it's clearly an attempt to be "gentle." It's not gentle to put your partner on an impossible quest to win you back before you leave forever.
This is my favorite Julia Nunes video, although I don't have an internet crush on her - I save that for ukulelezo.
Weirdly, I can sort of see there being a chance of reconciliation if both partners are unhappy with the relationship as it is because they both have the desire for the relationship to change. But in both cases, my friends are happy with the way things are and their partners are not. You really can't convince someone who's unhappy in a relationship that they are actually happy and enjoy it a great deal and that change would be bad.
I think there's alot to this, and perhaps a lesson for the happy partner. The fact is, if one of you is not happy the way things are, then things are eventually going to have to change. I think alot of people fight this, wanting to hang on to the relationship that they are happy with rather than trying to renegotiate a relationship that perhaps both people could be happy with.
The trial separation thing seems unnecessarily cruel in that situation, though it's clearly an attempt to be "gentle." It's not gentle to put your partner on an impossible quest to win you back before you leave forever.
Basing this solely on my own individual special snowflake experience, while what you are saying may be completely accurate from an outside perspective, the emotional "truth" may be very different -- that is, one may ask for the separation really as a stepping stone to making the final leap out the door all the while feeling fully convinced that it really is just a "trial" with a chance that things could get better.
Right, and in both cases, my friends' partners have been begging for change for years. I think in their eyes, my friends have been getting the relationship they want at the expense of the partners' experience. This is really last-straw stuff. My guy friend whose girlfriend is leaving keeps talking about how maybe he could become more like something she wants, be more aggressive and spontaneous, etc., but I've known him for 12 years; it's not who he is, and he's unhappy around people like that. Even if he could do it, it would make the relationship intolerable for him. And there are plenty of women who would like to be in a stable, drama-free relationship with a good-looking, decent, smart, funny guy who's totally reliable, right? He just can't imagine dating anyone else, I think.
And there are plenty of women who would like to be in a stable, drama-free relationship with a good-looking, decent, smart, funny guy who's totally reliable, right?
He probably can't think of any.
132: Sometimes a little bit of back and forth is really needed in order for the dumpee to really accept that the hammer has really come down and it's time to think about building a new life independent of the dumper.
I have a lot of beefs with my ex, but the one most people fixate on is something I completely understand and hold no grudge over: She slept with another man before telling me she was done with the marriage. It was horribly unpleasant at the time, but I understand that a big part of the motivation was to make it absolutely unambiguous that we were completely finished as a couple. Not just to me, but to her as well. Absent the infidelity I'm certain I could have convinced her to give it another try, go to counseling, all that stuff. She spared us both a long period of chronic misery (actually an extension of the ongoing chronic misery) by causing me acute short term pain. Absent that sort of unambiguous signal, a bit of kabuki may be a necessary part of getting to the next stage.
Sometimes the best course is just to drag the marriage out behind the shed and shoot it send the marriage to live on a farm in the countryside.
And there are plenty of women who would like to be in a stable, drama-free relationship with a good-looking, decent, smart, funny guy who's totally reliable, right?
So, uh, I've mentioned that I'll be in NYC in the fall, right...?
130: They ended up getting married and are still happily together 5 years later.
I'd go further than LB & Witt and say a 'trial separation' amounts to the act of emotional divorce. Or perhaps, a de facto divorce. The process of de jure divorce is working out who gets what, not what state the relationship is in. If you're considering a trial separation, you've already decided to split, but a sudden, total departure is too much to take.
I think in the case of your friends, what actually happened is what happen with some people who go through real divorces: they decide they made the wrong decision and get back together (and remarried) which doesn't happen often, but does happen. In your friends case, they managed an emotional divorce and remarriage without going through the legal process of divorce.
max
['It seems like it would be best then, if everybody treated trial separation as 'over' as fast as possible. That would maximize their chances of repairs.']
141: Come to think of it, NPH did the Liz Taylor/Richard Burton thing, and probably has insight on reassembling a marriage that had seemed to have ended.
140: You'd love him. A mutual friend of ours has become mildly obsessed with figuring out why the two of us have never been involved with each other, and really I think it comes down to the lack of aggression thing. He's a total catch, and wouldn't set off any skeeziness alarm bells for you.
Part of living in a bad marriage is expecting less, keeping your head down, I think. If this attitude isn't strictly compartmentalized to the relationship, life is hell. I guess it's possible that after coming to grips with living with lowered expectations, it becomes possible to find what's good in a partner again. Hopes and expectations for the relationship and for life ex-relationship are an important variable that makes generalizing hard; people who want the same things can I think enjoy companionable marriage.
That Sandra Tsing-Loh essay seems apropos; I rather liked it.
The singing girl is sweet.
Part of living in a bad marriage is expecting less, keeping your head down, I think.
This generalizes well beyond marriages, I think, and is typical response to bad situations.
142: and probably has insight on reassembling a marriage that had seemed to have ended.
Well, get him in here then: I'd be interested.
max
['You speak to your ex's? Whoa.']
Part of living in a bad marriage is expecting less, keeping your head down, I think.
Is this meant to be prescriptive or descriptive? I sort of get the idea, I think, but living with your head down and lowered expectations is so... soul-deadening.
The head-downing can be traumatic in itself. If you live for a long time with your head down, you can develop an awful tendency to cringe, apologize, never ask for anything you want, for years after the relationship is over. I did it for just a year in college and I still have to shake myself to think about what I might want in a relationship.
My ex did it for eight years of a bad marriage, and good Christ, that man was a wreck when I met him. It wasn't the trauma of her cheating on him and leaving him that fucked him up; it was the eight years of trying to make a crazy person happy.
soul-deadening
Most of my family members who lived this way did so under communism, in a place with low expectations for everyone, almost all the time. Getting to live most of your life well is a net win. Hell, getting to live any part well is a net win. Maybe the impossible political situation encouraged a mindset of compartmentalization, of adopting different attitudes in different situations. It's still the case that many divorced Czech couples cohabit, since getting another place used to be impossible, and is now merely very expensive.
Trying to make someone else happy is crazy, something completely different. By lowered expectations, I mean accepting that some good things are impossible in a bad relationship, not accepting explicit mistreatment.
Is this meant to be prescriptive or descriptive?
I read that as descriptive, fwiw.
It depends what the good things one wants are, I think, and deciding what is really non-negotiable. I'd guess a lot of us have decided in relationships that we were tolerating a lack of something that was actually intolerable to do without--safety, respect, minimal kindness, etc. At the time it just feels like you're doing normal head-down compromising, but then you figure out that those things are well within the range of non-negotiable needs.
Re: health insurance keeping people together, that basically happened with the parents of a college friend of mine. They were living separately but stayed married so she could stay on his health insurance, or maybe vice versa.
At the time I was impressed by it; it seemed like a much more amicable breakup than most if they can do that, or else he seemed much more noble than most people or just much more of a pushover. Now that I think of it, though, they were both still basically good parents, and splitting up just because they had fallen out of love or whatever you want to call it rather than because one of them had met someone else, and kicking your children's other parent off your health insurance just because you can would be a pretty crappy thing to do.
The mother is dead now. Lou Gehrig's disease. I don't remember if there were early signs when the marriage was ending or not.
Sure. But safety, respect, and kindness means living with a friend, not a partner.
Penelope Trunk is interesting on something closely related
Now that I think of it, though, they were both still basically good parents, and splitting up just because they had fallen out of love or whatever you want to call it rather than because one of them had met someone else, and kicking your children's other parent off your health insurance just because you can would be a pretty crappy thing to do.
An interesting situation. As in the famed violinist scenario, you have no obligation to keep the other person alive, but it costs you little to do so.
153: Like Gretchen Rubin at Slate, Penelope Trunk gives me the creeps. Presumably sexist, but I don't take particular pleasure reading the ruminations of dead-eyed, soulless men, either.
People are so hard on Kate Gosselin, but I think she is an anthem to Gen X women. She has taken charge of her career, and she has a job that accommodates her doing what she's good at, and her making time to take care of kids. She's an homage to the fertility mess Gen X has found itself in. She an homage to the fact that Gen X -- not Gen Y -- is the first generation to manage their children's online identities, and she's handling the issues with flair. And Kate is the quintessential Gen X mom getting post-baby plastic surgery.
How can one person be both an anthem and an homage? Impressive indeed.
But safety, respect, and kindness means living with a friend, not a partner.
You think partners should be dangerous, contemptuous and cruel? I'd have thought that if you loved somebody you'd be thinking safety, respect, and kindness as a background level to all the other stuff.
OK, if you mean that you can get that stuff from a friend, sure. But the longer I live the more I'm driven to conclude that the division between agape and philia is mostly artificial. Really you're saying, "Do you want eros with that, sir"
Sure. But safety, respect, and kindness means living with a friend, not a partner.
An interesting take. What distinguishes a friend from a partner? Sex?
Is this satire?
Holy crap I have to stop reading this blog, this woman is creeping me out.
In a review of this blog, Business Week called Penelope's writing "poetic."
Well, Business Week should know.
Is that sentence satire?
Funny. I saw 157, and thought , "now I know how CN'll be spending the day." Fortunately, you probably took her advice to abuse Aderall, which allowed you to resist the temptation.
157: Bizarre.
158: I will totally buy that many people are willing to put up with treatment from a partner that they wouldn't put up with from a friend. I am told this is what intimacy is all about. You can fight or occasionally be kind of a dick because there's a bond there that transcends the friend-bond.
For me, after over a year of putting up with a really dangerous and harmful relationship full of screaming, attempted murder and suicide, jealousy, etc., I'm particularly skittish about allowing a romantic relationship to lower my standards for reasonable treatment, to the point that it's really hard for me to fight, even when it's necessary, with a partner, or make any demands at all. I'm able to have tremendous intimacy with friends, but in relationships, intimacy is really scary.
Huh, I am surprised at the strong reactions. Her diction is shitty, and she's clearly writing fast. But she's intelligent and perceptive, and writes rationally about tradeoffs and non-transparent aspects of life today. I ignore the off-key columns, which yes are numerous. I am not that interested in her personality.
Yes, respect and kindness are a baseline. Partners trust each other with their weaknesses and also sleep together. Also they do not leave crumbs on my side of the bed.
166: I am not that interested in her personality.
Is this satire?
109: Dude, if you're going to shamelessly steal my ideas, at least give me a shout-out.
From 161: stand whenever you can when coworkers are sitting
One of my new co-workers does this and it takes all the self-restraint I can muster not to slap him. "Have a seat," he says, so he can bend down over me to talk at me. I am perhaps overly sensitive about this because I've been teaching so long that I am used to always being the one standing in the room if anyone is. Some office person who was showing me paperwork did this to me recently, too, and it made me bristle all over. "Have a seat"? Ugh. I wouldn't say that to anyone unless we were both sitting. (In class, it's understood.)
Thanks for the advice upthread. I seem to have defaulted into the "being available to listen without taking any sides" role, which has left me on good terms with both parties. But, OFE's right on about self-preservation. I had no idea how personally stressful this would feel to me, and it's a relief to be leaving town for a bit.
Is this satire?
Is this satire?
153: Huh, this Penelope Trunk woman (of whom I'd never heard) doesn't give Gen X a good name. Not that there's anything wrong with the post-divorce parenting setup she champions, but the self-satisfaction is distasteful.
it was the eight years of trying to make a crazy person happy.
I'd completely forgotten about this. The first few months we were dating, AB & I were sitting in her kitchen, and I said/did something defensive/preemptively apologetic (I can't for the life of me recall what - possibly something as inconsequential as being obsequious over taking the last cookie, or something), and AB said, "You poor, broken man." It was actually oddly empowering - "Oh, I don't need to cringe? My instincts and preferences aren't all wrong?"
165. Like I said, I think the difference between agape and philia is overrated. I would expect the same consideration - no, more consideration - from a lover than from a friend, but friend or lover, if that person has a bad stretch and falls short of their demonstrated high standards for a while, I would tolerate it - for a while - if the bond is there.
Caveat 1. Bonds are two way.
Caveat 2. Bonds can be broken.
174: Yeah, I think it was on our third date when, at some point during dinner, he started to tear up and was really embarrassed about it, explaining that it had been a long time since anyone looked him in the eyes and smiled. He was so grateful.
Of course, once he figured out that he could make decisions on his own, he became paranoid that I might try to control or change him. It wasn't a bad relationship in general, but I quickly learned never to call him unless I was returning a call, never to suggest something for us to do together, never to ask for anything. Head down.
175: I think, but please correct me if you believe I am misinterpreting, that you are deferring to "the bond" some of the connotations of agape and philia that you discount.
175: My take, too. It seems thought that a great many people expect far less from friendships.
Here's an aspect of the universal health-care debate that's been little talked-about: universal health care destroys your capacity for love.
||
I just got the most awesome fortune cookie: "You look pretty."
I'm taping it to my monitor right now.
|>
177: I was reading it more in the sense that agape is indispensable to philial love. Which is what I'm agreeing with (so hopefully that's what was actually meant), but also think is a higher standard for philia than most people impose.
this Penelope Trunk woman (of whom I'd never heard) doesn't give Gen X a good name [...] the self-satisfaction is distasteful.
We learned it from you, Mom!
[that's a little Boomer cliché joke. Not sincere]
179: But, as I mentioned in the previous thread, it allows you to beat people up without worrying that you'll force them into bankruptcy with medical expenses.
180: Last night a friend (girlfriend, I guess, although it's all pretty new, Yay me) and I ordered Chinese, and my fortune was one of those non-fortunes - "You are a perceptive and have a good sense of humor," something kind of like that - but I consider myself lucky, because her fortune sucked. I don't remember the exact words, but basically, "You will have to wait for spring for something good to happen to you."
182: I don't get it.
I mean, the piece linked in 153 goes on about how nobody knew how to play with their children until Gen X parents. That's just downright funny!
179: universal health care destroys your capacity for love
That's not what the Vietnamese lady said.
max
['And it was true!']
Yay Cyrus! Yay pretty-togolosh! And definitely yay fortune cookies. (Did you know they come in different flavors? Someone brought me strawberry-flavored ones last month and I was very surprised.)
Cyrus: it'll be Spring sorta soon in parts of the southern hemisphere. Maybe you're taking a trip!
182 made me laugh. Parsimon, I believe it was a reference to this.
but I consider myself lucky, because her fortune sucked. I don't remember the exact words, but basically, "You will have to wait for spring for something good to happen to you."
I hate to point this out, but this would seem to suggest you are not a good thing happening to her... Fortune cookies can be so cold.
190: But he's so perceptive! And has a good sense of humor!
191: I know, right? You'd think she'd appreciate this.
189: Oh, I was lying when I said I didn't get it. Still, Penelope is ridiculous.
182: PVP did a good comic parody of those ads, which I can't find on the site.
But he's so perceptive! And has a good sense of humor!
Penelope says cute and fun are the important things.
(Alright, I'll stop.)
Fortune cookies can be so cold.
I recently got a fortune cookie that read: "All is not yet lost." Perhaps that was supposed to be comforting, but it just seemed ominous.
My favorite ever was "Beware of friends, who are false and deceitful." So much cynicism provided by that one little comma.
Fortune cookies can be so cold.
191: 190: But he's so perceptive! And has a good sense of humor!
I don't think the fortune cookie is going to reciprocate.
max
['It's just not that into... well, not like that, anyways.']
199: Maybe it was supposed to be some kind of anti-Quaker thing.
The messages on the Yogi Tea bags I use in the mornings have begun to seem repetitive:
Listen, and your heart will follow.
All health comes of quiet dignity.
Open your mind and the world opens to you.
etc. I don't recall all the formulations, but man, I initially found them sort of charming, and now register mostly a "Yeah, yeah" response. It't too bad.
198: I got that one too! It's the "yet" that makes it so ominous.
The ones I hate are along the lines of "You are a hard worker," which I inevitably eat right after extending my lunch hour by 45 minutes to fuck around on the web.
190: Ouch, cold. Although, um, I guess maybe it meant no new good things going forward until spring. We had already met and got on a couple dates before we ordered Chinese. (I already mentioned this in a comment addressed to you no less, but I guess I was too oblique. Oh well.)
||
We're two houses from train tracks. The bell that says that a train is approaching has been dinging for the past three hours. The cars come to a stop, and then cautiously keep on going.
|>
202: Open your mind and the world opens to you.
'Your foppily drive is malfuntioning.'
max
['It Fish Time!']
Even wørse!
How could ruby have caught on for the web with no native unicode support?
208: Because people like you and heavy metal bands abused it.
210: "Because heavy metal bands and people like you abused it."? "Because people like you, and heavy metal bands abused it."? "Because heavy metal bands and other people like you abused it."? "Because people like you abused it, and also, because heavy metal bands abused it."?
Neither my and heavy metal bands' abusing ruby, nor our abusing its nonexistent native unicode support, could explain ruby's popularity.
212: its nonexistent native unicode support
Poor Ruby was aurally assaulted.
max
['Never been the same.']
Once word got out that I would willingly let people like nosflow abuse me, my popularity soared.
182: I don't get it.
self-satisfaction is a clichéed Boomer attribute. Therefore, a self-satisfied Gen-Xer, when confronted with self-satisfaction, could rightly claim to have learned that trait from her Boomer parent.
I am deeply sorry for this tiresome Standpipery.
205: You should call the police. And let us know whether they're helpful (unless they shoot you).
204: Ah, my bad. I read that comment, but guess I didn't actually process it... Someday you'll be old with cognitive degeneration, too. Also, Yay you!
218: Meh, I was being oblique, don't worry about it.
Also, thanks everybody.
Surprisingly, I'm pretty much with teo with regard to Ms. N/nes. I admire her spirit and all, but the (what I interpret as) high self-impressedness and "I'm so wild, aren't I?" of it just kind of puts me off.
That in itself wouldn't be disqualifying, but to me there's no countervailing guilelessly charming / unselfconsciously odd / damaged genius / whatever vibe to make me like her anyway. No hard feelings, actually, she's just not my cup of tea. I'd better never see her set foot on my lawn, is what I'm saying.
Anyway, I'm shocked, shocked, that's there's been a long comment thread vaguely related to ukulele with no mention of Petty Booka.
Also: Jake Shimabukuro is f&*king amazing. Thanks, J McQ!
You probably don't care for Joe Satriani either. Or Moses.
221: I probably wouldn't care to listen to much more of him, but that one youtube clip was amazing. I especially like that he didn't spend the entire clip mugging for the camera. And the lack of whistling whilst rapidly flapping his hands (presumably so as to imitate a bird?) was much appreciated.
Also, I don't care for Satriani.
But I do like Moses.
189: I went to college with that kid. Total stoner.
On fortune cookies, it's starting to irritate me that whoever writes the fortunes for the brand our local fast-cheap chinese place stocks is obviously playing to the "... in bed" game.
225 clearly belongs on the conspiracy thread.