Okay, first, I didn't mean to start a flame-fest. Can we bring it back
down to a reasonable level?
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Simon Britnell wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 15:02:50 -0400 (EDT)
> srl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I kinda find it offensive for anyone to more-or-less openly seek someone to be hir
> > maintainer-of-all-things-domestic-and-emotional.
>
> Some people *want* that - on both sides. I don't understand it, but
> some people seem to like that white picket fence stuff.
and it's fine if they want that, but i feel like too often
white-picket-fence is the normative ideal, and anyone who doesn't want it
(particularly females) takes a lot of shit.
> > I think it's part of being a responsible adult to take care of your own
> > life-- from doing the laundry to maintaining emotional well-being.
>
> Yes mommy (gotta love that sarcasm). "Being a responsible adult" is a
> phrase I singularly dislike. It pretty much translates to "I think you
> should behave like this and if you disagree with me you're just a little
> child". It tends to be used by those who think we should be "normal".
> "Get a haircut and get a real job" is a more "offensive" (but probably
> more honest and direct) form of the same clause.
I didn't mean it that way. I actually think that what I suggested (taking
care of oneself emotionally) is done by relatively few people that our
culture labels "responsible adults". I think a lot of kids and
non-"normal" people do a better job at emotional well-being than do people
who spend lots of time trying to fit the mold.
> Ever seen someone jump from a bridge? Anyone you know ever swing
> themselves from the ceiling? Ever consider doing it yourself? Ever
> have a conversation with somebody clinically depressed? Every wonder
> after the fact why you didn't spot the obvious pain? I can tick all
> those boxes and I'm telling you that there's more to it than "maturity".
> I translate your statement as "I don't want to deal with peoples
> emotional cr*p.".
That may be how you feel about what i said based on your experience. That
wasn't my sentiment.
> I don't blame you, neither do I. On the other hand I consider dealing
> with it a valuable contribution to the world. There are people who cope
> badly with life socially, emotionally or financially, but who do a good
> job & contribute to society in other ways. There are also people who
> are "nurturers" who get satisfaction and fullfilment from propping up
> those people.
And I've seen people of various genders get royally fucked up from
feeling like it was their personal mission to prop up their
clinically-depressed partner. I think nurturing is all well and good, so
long as one doesn't do it at the expense of hir own well-being.
I've seen lots of nurturers who wouldn't have gotten depressed themselves
if they'd encouraged their partners to go to therapy.
> > IMO, any geek--- male, female, or otherwise--- who aspires to this almost deserves
>to be single.
>
> Somewhat judgemental don't you think? I doubt anyone actually "aspires"
> to this. I know some (apparently) happy, successful people who see each
> other for only an hour or so each day. I also know some unhappy people
> in this same situation.
i see my SO for about that long a day. sometimes it works, sometimes it
doesn't. *shrug*
I didn't mean to be offensive or judgmental with what i wrote--- i was
intentionally overstating. I do think, however, that our society
encourages people to find a relationship instead of learning to be whole
people on their own. That's all i was saying.
srl
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
