I haven't cried once since I was 12 or 13.
I should point out that the non-sad parts of the movie are really quite funny. It's not all tears! People should go see it!
You should have stayed past the 15th minute! It gets better!
I haven't cried in a while. I tried to recently, but it didn't work.
From time to time I feel like crying but I shake it off with the aplomb that makes me so lovable.
Now I feel like I should try to make Weman cry.
I get stupidly sentimental all the freaking time. Last night i tried to hide the fact that Eric Clapton's Tears in Heaven was making me cry in the middle of a poker game, because I started thinking about his poor 4 year old falling off the balcony.
I always cry at movies. I cry at Steven Seagal and Van Damme movies. Up looks like it will impossible to watch, as in blind with tears for the entire movie.
I have been awfully sentimental of late, but not teary. I am usually teary. I have not been listening to sad music though.
Up was great! I think it helped that I was super-prepped for the sadness, because my boyfriend called me after he'd seen it going on and on about how sad and wonderful it was.
So I went in with a constitution of steel. Managed to hold out on the crying all the way until the last 5 minutes when I cried with happy.
It's weird how different movies hit you. I think the movie I cried the most in in the last 5 years was Wall-E, where I just bawled the whole time. A close second, strangely, was Blood Diamond. Those cute-ass kids, man.
I haven't cried once since I was 12 or 13.
This seems quite sad to me.
I cry at any old shit too. I can make myself cry by thinking about the "Daddy! My Daddy" bit in The Railway Children if I'm not careful. Have any of you ever read The Brothers Lionheart by Astrid Lindgren? I read that to my elder girls once - the first chapter was almost farcical with Kid B and I sobbing our eyes out, and Kid A rolling hers at us.
the "Daddy! My Daddy" bit in The Railway Children if I'm not careful.
Oh, that is a good one. Killer.
The first ten or fifteen minutes of Up slew me. My throat hurt from suppressing the sobs. I am a giant sap, though.
We saw it last night, and I was choked up for a lot of it. Afterwards, I was trying to figure out why, 'cause movies don't usually affect me that way. (The last one to make me cry was the Ralph Fiennes Sunshine.) I'm still not sure.
(My other reactions to the film: a) WTF is it with Pixar and the absent parents? And b) Up is the movie WALL-E wishes it had been.)
WTF is it with Pixar and the absent parents?
Kids' stories in general are replete with them. They give space for children to have their own adventures, and something for them to pine for/work against.
17: Yeah, intellectually I know that, but it stil bugs. But I'm not even sure that explanation fits in the context of Up; the movie is more Carl's story than Russell's, and other than setting up the coda having Russell's father be absent doesn't serve much purpose in the narrative. (And I think the coda could have been kept in an altered form if Russell's father were still around.)
I haven't cried once since I was 12 or 13.
This seems quite sad to me."
Huh. If you say so.
I wasn't bragging about it.
There's a period of about 24 hours in my cycle when I'll cry over almost anything.
Up sounds like the kind of movie I should avoid going to see then.
I used to not cry much at all, but after having kids, anything to do with children in hospitals or with diseases totally wrecks me. Can't handle.
Up was so great. What an incredible movie.
b) Up is the movie WALL-E wishes it had been.
So weird. They're both awesome! But different! You're weird!
the saddest, most depressing film I've seen in years
Definitely sad, but I didn't find it depressing at all.
21: I think part of the what-makes-you-cry equation is how close it feels to "That could be me." For a lot of people, having or loving a child expands their sense of "could have been."
One of the challenges for getting national attention to a hate-crime case like Vincent Chin or Matthew Shepherd is how many/few people can make that imaginative leap. There's currently a lot of coverge in the press about an American college student on trial for murder in Italy, and I suspect that a lot of the airtime is being driven by a disproportionate amount of "could have been my daughter" sense among newsroom decisionmakers.
23: I think we had this conversation last year. WALL-E was awesome until EVE showed up. Everything after that sucked.
And now I'm off to swimwork out!
26: an extremely strange opinion. Oh well! More Wall-E for me!
I cry for happy, not sad, though "happy" is broad enough to include all sorts of releases and catharses.
TDK:When Gordon tells his family he's alive, the last scene with the motorcycle. More. It wasn't MG dying, but the exchange with AE immediately preceding. For example.
So Up. Well, one can do some work by imagining an observation of great loss that would not make you. Bitter, enraged, closed, denial: although even those if intense enough can elicit empathy. Real empathy feels good.
The tears come at the Kubler-Ross stage:acceptance. I think tears of grief come when a hole is filled by remembrance, and I think they are pleasurable tears. Or an ecstactic pain. I could get weird here with talk of sphincter releases, and the pain/pleasure of the cloacal.
Or, since I rarely see this discussed in this way, I may just be a sick fuck.
Up! is a wonderfully bittersweet film. I found it really hard not to tear up during that montage of Carl and Ellie's life together, but what's great is the emotional weight that lends to all of Carl's later decisions, now that we know what's at stake for him. Russell is great, too. But "depressing"? No! It's a "power-of-friendship" movie whose point doesn't feel cheap and forced... unlike certain other recent "power-of-friendship" movies I could name.
And the dogs! The dogs were fucking great!
Definitely sad, but I didn't find it depressing at all.
Agreed!
19:Work on it. It is very good for you.
I would sometimes stare blankly when grieving, working on dredging up a remembrance to gain release,
As I was writing 28, I ws thinking of babies, who may refute me, as they so often do.
But pain without tears may be the worst pain, and may be a screaming pain. Had a bad stretch a couple weeks ago.
(Oh, incidentally, it's also worth seeing the film in 3D. In fact it's probably the first 3D movie I've seen that makes good use of that device.)
32: Yeah, I really appreciated that they didn't use the 3D for the sake of throwing things at the audience, but for adding depth of field. Very effective, particularly during the fight at the end, so much so that it set off my acrophobia pretty badly. My palms were sweaty by the end of the fight.
23, 27: You're using an awful lot of exclamation points today. Graduating got you giddy?
I haven't cried once since I was 12 or 13.
What do you do when you aren't masturbating, then?
I had remembered liking this review from David Edelstein contrasting Up and Drag Me to Hell, but you lot are suggesting he was forcing the contrast a bit. Must you ruin everything for me?
What do you do when you aren't masturbating, then?
Who says you have to stop masturbating?
||
The signatories to this letter make for an antecedently odd bunch.
|>
14: Have any of you ever read The Brothers Lionheart by Astrid Lindgren?
I was so excited by this that I've jumped ahead from comment 14. No, I haven't read The Brothers Lionheart, but Astrid Lindgren is, of course, the Pippi Longstocking woman, and Pippi Longstocking was my hero when I was a kid.
Anyway, as you were.
WALL-E was awesome until EVE showed up. Everything after that sucked.
As Sifu says, that that's crazy. Wall-E was awesome until Wall-E leaves Earth, and then was less good, but still good. And I don't think it would have been very good if they had just extended the Earth sequence, they would have had to either not make it a feature length film or have a less-good part. Also, Wall-E is better than Up which is both very good and nevertheless below average for Pixar.
It would be pretty easy to watch Nemo getting killed over and over and over.
Wall-E put two of the five of us to sleep.
I cry for happy, not sad, though "happy" is broad enough to include all sorts of releases and catharses.
I had to do a reading at my brother's wedding this weekend -- serious sobbing. Rory shed some tears, too, but that was mostly for dramatic effect.
Dolphins can sleep in one of their cerebral hemispheres at a time. I wonder if that is like having two out of your five Megan asleep.
Four of us are laughing; one is not amused.
It would be pretty easy to watch Nemo getting killed over and over and over.
Nemo was all right. But the DeGeneres fish could have used repeated killing.
Wall-E was awesome until Wall-E leaves Earth, and then was less good, but still good.
This is exactly right.
How ironic, that the it should have been better when sublunar! There is a lesson here for artists.
If I were a dolphin, would the two types of sleep feel wildly diffeent, or very similar?
I liked Up a lot.
As for the two movies I've watched on home video this week, "Total Recall" was probably worse than "My Night At Maud's", if only because of the sadistic violence.
Maybe dolphins have split personalities like split-brain patients.
There's a scene in Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey that had me balling my eyes out (it was Christmas Eve, I had made the decision not to go home to avoid familial tension, my roommate had left to go to our shared hometown for his family's Christmas, and it was on basic cable).
Anyway, it's two dogs and a cat, stranded thousands of miles from their humans due to a shipping mixup. It's partway through the incredible journey, and the older dog thinks that he isn't going to make it, he's never going to see his boy again...God. I just fell apart.
And Apo's right--anything to do with kids and I fall apart. Watching Tyson in The Hangover, even though it was a really funny scene, had me feeling incredibly sad for him because of what happened to his daughter a few weeks back. I'm such a sucker these days.
balling my eyes out
UR DOIN IT RONG
If I were a dolphin, would the two types of sleep feel wildly diffeent, or very similar?
Only one way to find out.
||
My roommates' cat—who's not exactly the Ted Nugent of cats—just alerted me to the presence of an injured bird in the yard. I don't speak cat, but he sure seemed to be saying, "Human! Human person! Come fix this thing! It's broken, and I'm afraid of it!"
|>
A comment at Pandagon about being a date-rape movie did take me aback. Wall-E does have his way with sleeping Eve, doesn't he.
My html failed. "...Wall-E being a date rape movie..."
58: similarly, we were at the zoo earlier, and there was a mountain lion who -- though he could not speak human -- seemed very clearly to be saying "can you please remove this heavy piece of plexiglass so I may eat that baby?"
And Sifu, being quite the gentleman, no doubt complied.
Wall-E was awesome until Wall-E leaves Earth, and then was less good, but still good.
Okay, maybe "sucked" is an exaggeration, but it damn sure wasn't good. The "haw haw, Americans are FAT!" attitude annoyed the fuck out of me (and Stanton's argument that the people on the ship were supposed to be babies was bullshit), and pretty much everything that happened on the ship was just contrived.
(I also have to admit that this article does not endear Stanton to me, and probably biases me against the film.)
And I don't think it would have been very good if they had just extended the Earth sequence, they would have had to either not make it a feature length film or have a less-good part.
Oh, I'm not arguing they should have extended the Earth sequence. I would have much preferred it as a short film than as the feature we got.
Basically, you don't like anything, right, Josh?
64: I like roses on raindrops and whiskers on kittens.
65: What about bright woolen kettles and warm copper mittens?
Or girls in white dresses tied up with strings?
66-7: I had a pretty ridiculous conversation with a friend today when, in response to some remark about her family's peach tree, I said, "You know, peaches come from a can. They were put there by a man."
We took it a bit far.
59: The fuck?
"I did a terrible, awful sexist thing! I... I held her hand! And me, a man of the cloth!"
63: The "haw haw, Americans are FAT!" attitude annoyed the fuck out of me (and Stanton's argument that the people on the ship were supposed to be babies was bullshit)
*eyeroll*
Come on. The humans on the ship are, to a one, nice friendly people, and heroes in the clutch. If you were going to set out to be nasty about fat lazy Americans, you'd do it differently.
*eyeroll*
I'm sure I'm wrong about this, but I'm actually getting a sense that this might have been intended to be condescending.
I haven't seen Wall-E, but this reminds me that I still have pie in the fridge.
"I did a terrible, awful sexist thing! I... I held her hand! And me, a man of the cloth!"
Awesome!
My my memory is that in the original it was a dialogue.
"I did a terrible, awful sexist thing! I... I held her hand!"
"And you, a man of the cloth."
"I know, I know."
I was going to bring my 5yo to Up butbeecejtly she has been worrying a bit about dying, so either it'll be good to see it or it'll cement her anxiety.
Wall-E was mostly great till the Axiom, then progressively more trite and formulaic till the tritefest of the credits.
butbeecejtly
I intend to use this word regularly.
I cannot get behind Wall-E as art. I find the Eve/Wall-E relationship entirely too disturbing. It's really not a movie I want my kids watching.This is a kids' movie. It bothered me greatly that the "romance" between Eve/Wall-E consisted in large part of 1) her mostly rejecting him before going unconscious; 2) him dragging her unconscious body around and having dates with it; 3) when she learns that he's been dragging her unconscious body around and having dates with it, she finds it sweet.
*eyeroll*
This is going to turn out like the Snow Crash discussion, isn't it?
77: How do you expect people who work at Pixar to know how dating is supposed to work?
OT:
So I finally got some of those Rancho Gordo beans everyone's been going on about, and tonight I made some pasta e fagioli with the cranberry ones. Really delicious.
Unfortunately (warning to sqeamish: do not read further!!!), I sliced the tip of my thumb off while dicing the onion. Took a bit of the nail and a sliver of flesh -- the little capillaries were bleeding for a while and there's a weird tingly pain when I press on it, indicating I sliced through some nerves, I think. So I applied direct pressure to stop the bleeding, then some neosporin on nonstick gauze with regular gauze over it. Will this heal? Do I need to see a doctor? A brief glance at cooking forums online suggests this is common and I'll be okay, though scarred.
BTW: My brother's definitely leaning toward Michigan, and the lawyers here were helpful.
81: Oh no, Bave! Your finger! You'll never be able to do, like, finger-stuff again!
It's just the wee tip. I'll be slightly deformed is all.
Will this heal? Do I need to see a doctor?
If you stopped the bleeding I really doubt there is much more a doctor is going to do for it.
Yeah, I just want somebody to make it all better.
81: Bave, it's dramatic, but you'll be fine.
85: neb! Do we need to know this?
81: Leave the knife, take the fagioli.
88: Like, kisses? Do you need kisses, Bave?
91: And how!
89: That is very reassuring. Nicely matter-of-fact.
92.2: Oh, sorry for the matter-of-factness, but hell, if you cut yourself a lot in cooking, taking a bit of the nail with it, applying pressure, and so on -- you'll be fine! I thought you were sincerely worried.
85: neb! Do we need to know this?
Well, it's true that my birthday won't be coming up for a while.
No, I was sincere, parsimon. Your tone was perfect. Neb's too.
I Was a Sincere Persimmon is a Pulitzer Prize–winning debut novel.
It's a scary thing, cutting yourself. I used to cut myself a lot when I started cooking seriously, and haven't made any new scars in about six years. But every time I did it, I was just terrified that I'd pull the towel away and find I'd -ectomied something I need. Kisses and matter-of-factness are all that really helps.
81: Bave, I did what sounds like the same thing to my index finger a month ago. ER doc cleaned it, applied neosporin and a bandage, and gave me a tetanus shot. And a very big bill. I'd skip the doc if I were you.
Exiled review of 'Up' , titled "Pixar Bastards Have Gone Too Far This Time".
99 is also reassuring.
I was only kinda worried, but I was a bit worried. I'm very bad at judging when to go to the doctor about things. I suspect I might be an illustration of why single men tend to die younger.
Aw, Bave. You will be fine, but uck.
I find that I almost never cut myself (though I do seem to nick my fingernails often, with graters and knives) - but I burn myself far too often. It's like there is a circuit missing in my brain when it comes to remembering that, you know, the oven is hot! I'm waiting for the day that it's something spectacular and serious.
102: I screw up with the burning as well.
This comment otherwise written: Oh, burning -- peh. Got little burn marks on my fingers, sure, who doesn't? Uh. This is normal, and it all turns out fine!
I knew a guy who drove a screwdriver through his palm (the tool, not the drink) and didn't go to the hospital until his wife came home and made him.
But what about the severed tip of your thumb, Bave? Did you retrieve it from the diced onion, or...(shudder)?
Did you retrieve it from the diced onion, or...(shudder)?
Why do you shudder?
104: Did he take the screwdriver out of his palm on his own, or did he wait for his wife to make him do that too?
107: Pulled it out, taped it up, and kept on working.
Did you retrieve it from the diced onion, or...(shudder)? did you eat it with some fava beans and a nice chianti?
109: A red wine with thumbtips? How declasse.
I think that most of the time when I've sliced a bit of finger off I've ended up eating it accidentally. Anyway, why not? It would only go to waste otherwise.
Actually, I've heard your thumb grows back faster if you eat the part you cut off.
Also, you become as courageous as a thumb.
Speaking of red wine and food, I finally got around to making tasty oeufs en meurette (the sauce, which doesn't feature prominently in the photo but does figure prominently in the dish, is red wine-based). As you can see, I poached the eggs for a little too long, but it was delicious nonetheless.
I see you used some of your many scapes, too.
Bave reminded me that I'm out of RG beans, so I just ordered the scarlet, white, and black runners and the lilas and reboseros. Mmmm.
And I have many more to use. They were powerfully garlicky. Maybe I'll have them all for breakfast before getting on a plane Wednesday morning, to share the fragrance with my fellow passengers.
Bave cut himself to turn this into a food thread.
Jesus! Our CSA's newsletter this week featured garlic scapes, and I thought of you. Of course, aside from making pesto from them (which hadn't occurred to me until last year, and I still haven't done it), there wasn't much to add.
By the way, scapes will last for a long time in the fridge. You needn't use them all before you head out of town.
I ate a big sandwich but there was no sweater involved, so my commenting fu's all wonky.
118: It's better than a Pixar thread, right?
I couldn't find the severed bit of thumb. I threw out some of the diced onions, but maybe not the right part.
I find myself wondering, now that my knife has acquired a taste for human flesh, should it be put down, or is this just part of the seasoning process?
Those oeufs look great.
Jesus! Our CSA's newsletter this week featured garlic scapes, and I thought of you.
"Eat this, in remembrance of me."
Yeah, garlic scape pesto sounds good. If I had more time this week, I'd experiment, but it may have to wait until next season. Basil has begun showing up at the market. For chrissakes, it's almost fall again.
Our CSA's newsletter had an article titled "A little eggplant goes a long way, but that's what grew best. Sorry."
124 posted before reading 120. Hmm, maybe I should get some more while they're still available.
I made a fantastically good triple-chocolate mint pie, which strangely enough did not use any of the abundance of fresh mint growing in my backyard. It's getting invasive. Any ideas? Besides tea and drying it for sachets?
And speaking of food, amazing and wonderful to see this picture of newly released Uighurs fishing in Bermuda.
122: You now have the kitchen knife equivalent of Stormbringer.
Now that I've successfully turned this into a Michael Moorcock thread: If you had to be trapped in an elevator, would you rather be trapped in an elevator with Elric, Corum, or Hawkmoon? If your daughter was going to date one, which would you choose?
125: That's why I serve kudzu salad at all my dinner parties.
71: Just exasperated, not intended to be condescending.
127 -- Let's just hope the forces of ignorance and bedwettery aren't able to gain the upper hand in Bermuda.
Our CSA's newsletter had an article titled "A little eggplant goes a long way, but that's what grew best. Sorry."
Our CSA's farmer posted something a couple of weeks back saying: "I've been getting many inquiries about when we'll be getting asparagus. Short answer: we won't be." [Insert longer answer here.]
132: A more optimistic note might have said, "Don't you hate it when your pee smells all asparagussy? No worries this year!"
Those oeufs look great.
I think that, separated from the full name of the dish, we can just call them eggs.
133: Yeah, well, the CSA's farmer prefers the direct approach, which is not free of lecture either. I can't blame him. The swipple members sometimes don't get things about local soil and weather conditions, the needs of various crops and the lands on which they're grown, and the fact that the farm is not a grocery store.
Ahem. So the farmer has to be stern sometimes.
131: Yeah, I was actually considering writing a letter to the editor (or novella, as they seem to be there) to a local paper saying that I'd never considered Bermuda for a vacation before,* but I would now, on account of their decent and humane action.
*Completely true; I don't like beaches much.
That's a really good idea, [redacted] Go for it. I'd do it too, but my objectivity might be in question . . .
I think that, separated from the full name of the dish, we can just call them eggs.
Oh thank god.
132: They used to have wild asparagus picking back home.
On reflection, that would be a good thing to tell your kids if you are really going to go drink beer in a pasture. Only fair since we used to tell the adults all sort of stories so we could go drink beer in the pasture.
The swipple members sometimes don't get things...
'Swipple' as the opposite of 'DFH'?
139: If you were going to tell people you were picking wild asparagus, I guess you'd have to bring some wild asparagus home, as a cover. Which would be fine.
There is one -- one! -- wild asparagus stalk here in our backyard. We don't pick it, because, really: it's one piece of asparagus. It's pretty standing up tall and proud there. It's not clear to me how asparagus propagates.
It's not clear to me how asparagus propagates.
Vulgarly.
140: Hm? I'm not sure why you'd put it in those terms.
141: We used to grow a bit of it. That kind of Jurassic-looking mini-tree has seeds, doesn't it?
I guess you'd have to bring some wild asparagus home, as a cover.
You could explain that there was no wild asparagus to be had, not even for ready money.
143: because otherwise it's meaningless.
144: I'm not sure. The one we have here grows to four feet or so, and develops lovely fronds which wave in the wind. Perhaps it needed a mate?
147: I seem to recall little green balls hanging from the fronds. I'm fairly certain they spread underground also. Isuppose I could look it up.
In the end, giving meaning to anything via the terms "swipple" and "dfh" might be an instance of obscurum per obscurius.
Swipple nicely gave SWPL a standardized pronunciation. Maybe DFH needs the same. Difeh?
Blume was just regretting the fact that her original intention in coining swipple -- making fun of the whole stupid concept -- has been lost. Of course, she also said I shouldn't bring that up, because who needs to have that discussion again?
Off to bed!
Would it be swipple to have that discussion in a very earnest manner?
143: because otherwise it's meaningless.
No. In the way in which I used it, "swipple" here means people who are disconnected from the very ground of the things in which they are participating. They are CSA members -- community-supported agriculture. They are supposed to get that the conditions of the land vary from year to year. They do not get this, often.
I don't need to define swipple over against some other thing, other than a broad notion of people who do get the concept of agricultural contingency, in order to make myself clear. Bringing DFHs into it is contentious.
Asparagus propagates by seed. In well-drained soil, it should produce for maybe 20 years. Phillips and Rix claim that it is "the most delicious of all vegetables," which coming from them seems like uncharacteristically intemperate enthusiasm. Impossible to say whether they're right.
They discount artichokes, which are good. It's a fact.
To be fair, they merely neglect to lavish the same praise on the artichoke. They do note that "In England it was always considered an aristocratic vegetable, and was grown at least from the sixteenth century when it was a favorite of Henry VIII, possibly because it was considered an aphrodisiac."
136, 137: That does sound like a good idea. I actually have a friend from college who grew up in Bermuda and went back there after she graduated, but I've never really considered going there. Hmmm...
It's better than a Pixar thread, right?
On which topic, Jesus Christ but this post (in response to this) is a fucking trainwreck.
re: 150
Pronounced 'doof', no?
Only vaguely related to a few of the preceding comments, but relevant enough since this is the sort of thing in which the Mineshaft usually takes an interest:
So there's this mother and daughter visiting the park yesterday and today. (There's apparently a grandmother with them as well, but she hasn't been with them that I've noticed when they've come into the Visitor Center.) They live in Charlottesville. The daughter's a high-school junior interested in studying southwestern archaeology (!) in college, so they're on some sort of college tour of the southwest; they visited UNM just before they came here and I think they have some other colleges on their list to visit after this. I talked to them briefly when they first came in yesterday afternoon, but not enough to get even that much information. They were, however, at the evening program last night, and I talked to them a bit afterward about colleges and where best to go for southwestern archaeology (the southwest, of course, though there are a few other schools) and gave them the name of an archaeologist at UVA who happens to study Chaco. They had visited some of the sites and had some additional questions, but we were closing up so they said they'd come in today to ask them.
Somehow this seems to have convinced one of my (female) colleagues that the daughter would be perfect for me. I said she seemed a little young for me, but my colleague didn't seem to see that as much of a problem. "You know, maybe in a couple of years..." she said. I was unconvinced.
Anyway, I come in to work today and there's the girl, sitting on a couch in the Visitor Center writing in her journal. My colleague makes sure to point her out to me, but I just smile at her and she smiles back. "She's shy," my colleague says. "You'll have to make the first move." Later, after my colleague leaves, the mom shows up and they both come up to the desk and ask me their questions, which turn out to be both rather complicated and extremely perceptive; basically, the sort of things professional archaeologists who study Chaco argue endlessly over. I answer them in my customary way, with lots of background, detail, and nuance. They seem pleased with the answers (the daughter especially), say goodbye, and turn to go. Fair enough, and that's the end of that, I think.
Except that it isn't, and they end up coming back to the desk a few times to ask additional questions. They eventually ask if they can take a picture of me. I agree, of course, get my Smokey Bear hat, and the mom takes a picture of me next to the daughter, who is holding our model of Pueblo Bonito. It's all very cute. They turn to go again, but then they come back and ask if I have an e-mail address. I do. I write it on one of their brochures, and tell them to send me a copy of the picture and that the daughter can e-mail me if she has any additional questions. The mom is sure she'll have some.
So anyway, that's the story. We'll see what happens.
It took me a couple of variations to track down the reference in 73, but I found it. (And then remembered it.)
We'll see what happens.
Please don't let the words "statutory rape" be involved...
Please don't let the words "statutory rape" be involved...
Yes, avoiding those words is a big part of my approach to this.
A high school junior is what, 17? Here in the UK that'd be perfectly legal, but definitely a little strange.
That does seem very young for a work colleague to think they'd be appropriate for you.*
* Although, fwiw, when I was 17/18 my then girlfriend was 24.
"statutory rape"
Nah, teo only looks 15. I'm almost certain he's legal now.
I believe she's a rising junior (i.e., her junior year starts in the fall), which means she's probably 16 right now. I don't know the specifics of the laws, which in the US vary by state, but I believe in most states that would be either outright illegal or in some sort of gray area.
Bringing this up during the Europe-and-California stage of the Unfogged daily cycle is likely to lead to interesting results.
And yeah, I did find my colleague's attitude a little odd, as did my other colleagues.
Yeah, a work colleague trying to set up someone who is a college graduate with a 16 year old is a bit odd.
Then again, I was often quite surprised (and a bit skeeved out) when talking to female friends to find out how many of them had had much older boyfriends when they were high-school age.
Wait until marriage, Teo. Don't touch that girl.
But you can probably start the bride-price negotiations. (Or are you from a dowry culture? If so, woo-hoo!)
No problem, sugar. With that settled, I'm off to bed. 'Night.
Or are you from a dowry culture?
I don't think so, no, but I should probably check with an anthropologist before making any rash bride-price-related decisions.
Anyway, just to clarify because I probably won't be around for any discussion of this in the morning, I have no intention of doing anything about this. I just think it's an interesting story about my romantic misadventures, a staple of Unfogged in bygone days which has mostly disappeared lately (not without reason). And with that, I'm off to bed. Good night, all.
I expect your colleague was joking. Do remember that girls mature faster than guys, so guys her age are mostly little twerps. She is probably starved for articulate male company, and upon meeting a graceful and handsome gentleman, such as yourself, it is little wonder she would fall for him despite some difference in age.
Be sure to post the photo so we can see if she's a hottie.
---
You know what will really cheer up Becks? (Re)watching the Lakers win the championship is what. Lamar Odom ought to be the patron basketballer of Unfogged. All talent and no focus; that's us.
Kobe!
Please don't let the words "statutory rape" be involved...
Sounds like the mom likes him, which means no one will press charges!
Be sure to post the photo so we can see if she's a hottie.
Word. Damnit Teo, you're supposed to describe the girl in these stories.
maybe "sucked" is an exaggeration
Exaggerated praise, I assume.
Has she friended you on Facebook yet? Maybe she can't do that from her mobile, and has to wait until she gets home.
My mother was constantly pulling that shit, sorta-setting me up with significantly older dudes we ran into when I was in high school. I found it terribly embarrassing, but I was shy. I used to wonder what she thought was going to happen, whether she imagined that we were going to have a relationship or something. Now I think what she was doing was saying, in her weird way, this is what a decent, interesting grown-up man looks like. Her choices were odd because they weren't like sweet prim Christian guys, but they were usually cute in some unconventional way, and smart and attentive. She didn't think anything would happen between us, but that I'd get better taste in dudes.
Conversely, I've also thought that her flirt-mediation between me and older dudes was about fantasy-fulfillment for her. She married my dad when she was very young and missed out on dating cute funny 20-somethings. She often says that one of the benefits of being a fat old lady is that she can flirt with cute young 20-somethings without anyone getting their panties in a twist because no one takes it seriously. She had some really obvious crushes on a few of my high school and college friends, most of whom were skinny punkish bad boys who thought she was funny.
Most disconcerting of all was when she developed one of these crushes on the older dude who, unbeknownst to her, had taken my virginity. He traveled through my hometown for work and my mom made him dinner, washed his clothes, repaired a few buttons, and gushed for months--oh, AWB, he's so cute! have you ever thought about... you know, he's so cute. Not that I'd want you dating someone like that, of course, but...
So, to come full-circle, she's either trying to train her daughter's perception of what a cute nice young smart guy is, or she herself found you attractive in that "if I were 20 years younger" way. Both are interesting, but neither means she's pimping her daughter out.
That reminds me that she once kept up a semi-flirtatious correspondence with a rather well-known rock star in part by talking about how much her 17-year-old daughter would get along with him. She even took me to one of his shows, but didn't get the chance to introduce us. I don't think it was really about me. I was never that big of a fan of the band.
Moms are weird.
A cute nice young smart guy who's involved professionally with the girl's chosen field (which has maternal approval, and possibly some fulfillment by proxy involved). From the parental side, this is a no-brainer.
re: 186
Yeah, I can sort of see that. I remember relationships where it was pretty clear that the girlfriend's mother liked me at least as much as the girlfriend did -- because I was the sort of person they'd maybe have picked for themselves if they were younger.
It works the other way too, I had one male friend who used to come to visit more often that he otherwise would have done because he clearly wanted to flirt with my mother.*
* who was highly amused and much more aware that he was doing this than I suspect he was himself ...
I was thinking about bermuda for vacation for the same reason.
Yesterday I roasted a whole big pan of scapes, and the results were delicious.
OT:
I think we've talked here about how some public schools are sending home messages informing parents of their children's BMI's and whether or not that's a good thing. Having just received such a notice, I realize there are problems with it I hadn't anticipated: Sally is believed by the NYC public school system to have a BMI of 88. While I've always valued her highly, I hadn't realized she was made of solid platinum.
OT:
I think we've talked here about how some public schools are sending home messages informing parents of their children's BMI's and whether or not that's a good thing. Having just received such a notice, I realize there are problems with it I hadn't anticipated: Sally is believed by the NYC public school system to have a BMI of 88. While I've always valued her highly, I hadn't realized she was made of solid platinum.
I hope that's a misprint for 18.8 rather than 8.8 which I initially thought. You'd notice if she'd starved to death, wouldn't you?
Wow! Someone can't do maths. Or Sally should be an Olympic weightlifter.
(Marking your post OT as if -- as if! -- there was a topic on which we were attempting to stay: *guffaw*)
Sally is believed by the NYC public school system to have a BMI of 88. While I've always valued her highly, I hadn't realized she was made of solid platinum.
Man, talk about major resale value. You'd be the goose that lays the platnium eggs. Misprint!
max
['They're saying she needs more sandwiches!']
Gee. Telegraph-y.
Anyways, Teo, you know, she might have gushed to her mom and anybody else who could hear about how cute you were. Thus the attempts to help the shy girl with introductions.
max
['See what she says in her emails.']
Coming late to it, but Bave- if you're going to do more cooking soon or other things that might get stuff into your wound you should pick up some finger cots. Helps keep the wound clean and dry with minimal interference. Alternatively, if you feel super macho, use New Skin, which is a paint-on latex that seals the wound very nicely but hurts like a motherfucker when you first put it on.
I'm constantly cutting and burning myself, and my preference is New Skin unless there's significant exposed meat (as here, f'rex). Good stuff to have around, anyway.
I think I've cut myself cooking maybe once in several years. What do people do to cut themselves all the time?
I play that game where you lay your left hand flat on the table, and try to stab the knife between your fingers as quickly as possible.
There's a particular type of knife that always leads me to cut myself -- small paring style knives where the blade is serrated and has a flat rather than curved cutting edge -- so I stopped using them. But with ordinary large chef's knives, I almost never cut myself.
Also I carry a knife in my mouth, like a pirate.
199: In my case it's working in a lab building experiments. Any time you cut metal you end up with sharp edges, and sooner or later you get cut. It's part of the trade. I haven't had skin completely free of at least one healing wound in two decades, roughly.
My most embarrassing self inflicted injury was bloodless, though - I nearly punched myself out while tightening bolts. Wrench slipped off the bolt and Blam! Tunnel vision, loss of spatial orientation, everything but actual loss of consciousness. Didn't know it was possible, but it is. Also the worst punch I've ever taken and the most effective one I've ever delivered. I am confident that if push comes to shove, I can kick my own ass. Laydeez.
bermuda is beautiful and I recommend it highly. we used to go down to greet my grandfather coming in on the bermuda race. pink beaches!
my mom encouraged my relationship with my 30-year-old photography teacher when I was in middle and high school, up to a point, and I have no idea why. she was pretty crazy then, being an active alcoholic, and just generally liked to cause trouble. they got along well and used to talk on the phone sometimes. she would give him shit about being in love with me. as my daughters get older it occurs to me that they will someday be beautiful, smart, funny teenage girls, and all sorts of skeezers will be hitting on them all the time. it's hard to know how to talk realistically to them about that without making it sound like men are universally a bunch of amoral, horny assholes. if I really notice some adult being captivated by them I am going to have a strong urge to break his fucking jaw with a baseball bat.
re: 205
Yeah, I can see that. Those sorts of work situations are quite unlike ordinary domestic cooking though.
I'm constantly cutting and burning myself
Togolosh is emo as hell.
I nearly punched myself out
You should read The Knockout Artist.
202. Agree with ttaM that the safest knife is a decent size with a firm non-flexible blade. Little bendy things have no place in the kitchen except for special effects carving. I regard myself as a bit on an expert - I don't cut myself often but my INR is maintained between 3.5 and 4.0, so it's a bit noticeable when I do.
207: Some of us are just clumsy. Currently, it is only rarely that I cut myself while cooking, but when I first started cooking on a regular basis, I just to do it all the time. It took a couple of years to get better with a knife. And, if I use something fancy, like one of those slicers with the blade built in, I'm still very likely to bark my knuckles.
I've wondered how to talk about that with Sally. I didn't have any particularly significant experiences with older men as a teenager, but did get hit on a couple of times, and had a friend's father get creepily wistful at me (oh, he didn't do anything actually out of line.) Mostly, it freaked me out because I wasn't sure what was going on or if I was imagining it. I've been trying to come up with some clear, non-scary way of telling her, when she's twelve or so, that "Some grownup men are going to think you're attractive in an adult way now, and some of them, who have no sense of what's appropriate, may hit on you. This doesn't mean you've done anything to invite it, and it's not your problem, just move on and don't let it bother you."
I've thought about how one should prep girls for their teenage years, and I've come to the conclusion that it's not about warning them about boys, per se. It's more about warning them that they should not invest too heavily in anyone who values them solely for their looks.
men are universally a bunch of amoral, horny assholes
just men?
I think a lot about how to talk about love with my son. Social interactions with friends seem like they'll carry over, right now-- fostering a BS filter for flattery and manipulation seems like a good start. Learning how to see what's good in other people underneath the surface seems much harder, partly because it is exceedingly hard for me to do that.
Although 212 doesn't address the creepy older man thing. I just think it is crucial to keep girls in touch with the non-looks-based part of themselves in their tween and teen years.
214: That wasn't so much a problem for me -- I was deeply in touch with the non-looks-based part of myself, and probably could have done with a little contact with some part of myself focused on what my clothes looked like in my teenage years. I was just seriously confused and bothered by getting hit on at twelve or thirteen, when I still thought of myself as a child.
yeah, when guys first start yelling things at you on the street or coming up to you randomly to hit on you it just freaks you out. as I got older I developed various strategies but when you're 12 you aren't likely to know how to get rid of an adult behaving in such an inappropriate way.
I always had this I Love Lucy divide in my teenage life, where I could either make a lot of jokes but be percieved as totally asexual, or suppress myself and do the peppy simpering thing and recieve a ton of positive reinforcement. It deeply fucked with my head.
213: Yeah, I worry about this too. I haven't come up with a better approach generally to advise my kids about than (1) try to be clear about what you, yourself, actually want and actually enjoy, and (2) be kind to people.
I think being clear about what you want is hard when you're a kid. Seems answering that question is what a big part of what growing is about.
213: I have to struggle sometimes not to feel generically hostile towards men. I was talking to this girl just now whose 40 year old NA sponsor got involved with her when she was a miserable 17 year old trying to quit heroin. it made me so sad and angry. I sometimes have a very visceral reaction to things like that and just think 'I hate all those fuckers.' I myself, my mom, my step-mom and my grandmother have all been raped; my grandmother gang-raped in a home invasion. there's not a woman in the world that ever did anything a hundredth so evil to me and mine.
Alameida, you've had some pretty rough experiences. Hopefully your kids will never have to deal with 1/2 the things you've had to.
219: I don't think it's easy, but I do think it's important and helpful, and starting to focus on it early is a good thing.
I've been trying to come up with some clear, non-scary way of telling her, when she's twelve or so, that "Some grownup men are going to think you're attractive in an adult way now, and some of them, who have no sense of what's appropriate, may hit on you. This doesn't mean you've done anything to invite it, and it's not your problem, just move on and don't let it bother you."
I think you just answered your own question.
they better not. I would be seriously tempted to kill somebody in that circumstance.
not to kill the thread, either; I'm just explaining my negative attitude.
223: Yeah, but bringing it up out of the blue seems stressful; I'm hoping to avoid "So, I've noticed you have tits now. Let me explain how they'll make your life difficult."
I think I've cut myself cooking maybe once in several years. What do people do to cut themselves all the time?
I don't cut myself very often. In this case, the knife wasn't really as sharp as it should have been. In the future, I can wave my foreshortened thumb at youngsters and warn them of the dangers of dull kitchen knives.
When I changed the dressing this morning, the wound looked smaller than it did last night. It's still a patch of raw flesh that's throbbing a bit and is going to take a while to heal, but I'll survive.
I think that alameida's question is at the heart of what we attempt to do as parents.
You have to simultaneously attempt to make sure that your children have sufficient self-esteem, education, and awareness of the evilness of the world, yet try to let them be children.
I have not personally experienced the evilness of the world like alameida, but I see it frequently in my professional life.
I think part of the what-makes-you-cry equation is how close it feels to "That could be me." For a lot of people, having or loving a child expands their sense of "could have been."
Yes, definitely. I'm a little scared to see Up because stories that involve someone starting to comprehend that they will never, ever again see someone who has died really set me off since a particular death a few years ago. Also anything with danger, sadness or tragedy involving an animal. Christ but I cannot handle that. Kids don't bother me in the least. Yes, I am an asshole.
One of the moments of really loving humanity, though, was the end of A.I.. I was a wreck by the time the credits rolled and went flying out of the theatre to the men's room so I could be distressed in private. I got there to find it packed with fellow sobbers who had beaten me there.
(oops. didnt finish.)
Navigating that line is difficult. My 13 1/2 yr old son went with our neighbors to the river last weekend.
I tried to remind him of these things:
1. it is wrong for an adult to touch him or him to touch an adult
2. he can tell me ANYTHING
3. Statistically, neighbors and family friends are the most frequent child abusers.
4. and, to Have fun!
226: but aren't there going to be a lot of naturally-awkward/stressful young-teenage moments when this sort of thing could be mentioned with only moderately increased awkwardness? Like, something to bring up around the time she's buying her first bras, etc. (perhaps in a conversation alongside other motherly "things to know about your new body"-type advice)?
my older daughter is really sensitive and has 'bad thoughts' at night sometimes that keep her from sleeping. I sort of don't know how to warn her about evil people without freaking her out really bad.
Also anything with danger, sadness or tragedy involving an animal. Christ but I cannot handle that. Kids don't bother me in the least.
What if it's a butt baby though?
There's a Malcolm in the Middle episode where Jane Kaczmarek gives a speech to one of Malcolm's friends who is getting breasts. I remember it includes the lines "Don't slouch" and "you'll be grateful for them when you get to college."
232: I think it's hard to get fully across that it is happening because you now look a certain way, but also has nothing to do with you personally, and isn't your fault.
I sort of don't know how to warn her about evil people without freaking her out really bad.
It is hard to warn kids that the really dangerous people are friends and family, not the scary boogie man with a trench coat.
This is a topic that freaks me out bc my 17 year old isnt very verbal and, statistically, I think something like 80 percent of people like her get sexually abused. (ok, I am making that up, but it is prob close.)
Just about to turn eight and ten. I'm jumping the gun on teenagedom with Sally a little because she's so tall -- even though she's only nine still, at 5'1" I'm worried that she's entering the "Looks old enough to hassle" zone.
How old are your kids now, LB?
Still too young for you, apo. Hold your horses.
233: Keegan went through a stage of this. Lasted about six months or so, then just went away.
I came back to revise and extend my remarks in 197 (without regards to the rest of the thread) since I figure they will be viewed uncharitably. To wit and namely, I see no reason for Teo (who seems the very avatar of harmless) to go into paranoid mole mode and avoid this girl like the plague. That said, this country IS bugfuck, so I can understand his caution. My thought was, is that if the mother is pushing the girl off on Teo, he won't hear from her, or if he does, she'll roll her eyes at her mom. OTOH, if she has a crush, or just wants a friend, it's harmless to talk to her, provided he keeps things on the up and up, noting her that the mother knows.
I would in no way urge any young gentlemen (or any young lady) such as Teo to violate the law, in fact the opposite, and would futher recommend operating with a sharp awareness of the law at all times. That said, it is entirely ridiculous that I think Teo is right to go into full paranoia mode, when, in in two or three years things might work out nicely indeed. Or not, as the case may be.
Because it seem to me (sans prompting) neccessary to add the fucking boilerplate, I motion that this nation be renamed the Confederation of Raving Bugfuckistan and the national motto be changed to 'WE SUCK HARDER'.
max
['That is all, and thank you for your attention.']
OT: I played Apo's mixes all weekend as we hung out with friends in the back yard. Apo's mixes got high ratings. Thanks!
The thing I always worry about "talks" is that they're totally ineffective. I can't remember any talk having an impact on me, at least not compared to my parents' pervasive general unspoken attitude on the topic.
I have the same poor opinion of first day of class lectures. It doesn't matter what the hell you say in your syllabus, or whether you point it out on the first day; it's how you conduct your class day in and day out. (I'm not talking about grade breakdown; I'm talking about stupid shit like "Respect each other's opinions". You have to implement that, not state it outloud.)
(You would not believe how many of my cow-orkers routinely bitch about something like that going wrong in their classroom, despite their having stated it on the first day.)
230: Heh. Sally's Little League coach took the team to the batting cages a couple of times, and I had pretty much that conversation with her. Nothing at all against the coach, who seems to be a prince, but I could be wrong.
Yes, definitely. I'm a little scared to see Up because stories that involve someone starting to comprehend that they will never, ever again see someone who has died really set me off since a particular death a few years ago. Also anything with danger, sadness or tragedy involving an animal.
While Up is very sad in parts, none of those things happen, particularly. So you should be fine!
For example, we certainly got told that honesty was the best policy. But there was a complex system of "when it's in your best interests to lie" that was subtly conveyed, even if my parents didn't consciously want that to be the take-home message.
With skeezy men, parents communicate this by demonstrating what kind of interactions warrant how much attention, in daily life. Like, if someone is panhandling and it turns into an intrusive conversation, how long does the parent participate? At what point do they wriggle out? Does this warrant being rude? Etc.
You would not believe how many of my cow-orkers routinely bitch about something like that going wrong in their classroom, despite their having stated it on the first day.
My current theory is that anything important needs to be said at least three times in three different media: once in person, once in writing, and once in some sort of exercise or activity that reinforces the basic message. This is true both of course content and information about course mechanics.
245 is not wrong, but "particularly" is doing a lot of work there. The whole movie is about Carl making his remaining years honor his late wife, and there are moments that drip with sadness for his loss.
Also 242 is true many times over.
243: The thing I always worry about "talks" is that they're totally ineffective. I can't remember any talk having an impact on me, at least not compared to my parents' pervasive general unspoken attitude on the topic.
I don't think one-time talks are worth much -- I do have a certain faith in repetition. There are things I go over and over again: if you want to be good at something, you can be -- you just need to work at it; most things that are too scary to try are much less scary in retrospect; that sort of thing. And I say them over and over again to the point where I refer to them as "You know I always say this, but remember how I was right the last four times?"
249: well, sure, but the entire movie is also suffused with explicit awareness that she's gone.
248: But what kind of message are you talking about here? Course mechanics, sure. But for general classroom conduct, I still believe that you're conducting yourself and the classroom in such a way that the policy is constantly expected, (since I consider you to be someone who runs a productive classroom.)
At the bohemian party last week, the oldest fellow there was talking about his kids, and how fast they've grown up (son is 17, daughter 15). Apparently the daughter attended a party recently with many of the other folx at this party, and the hostess, who is tres formidable took the daughter's boyfriend (who is 18, but not a bad sort according to the dad) aside and said "Look, if you make her cry, you're going to answer to me!"
So the solution to the dilemma is clearly to make friends with big, brawling, hardcore pyrotechnicians who will intimidate any men who are interested in your daughters.
I really do envy the kids in the scene though, all kidding aside. They're growing up with strong feminist consciousness, and a lot of adult role models who prove that you don't have to be a straight-arrow, Richie Rich brown-noser to have a good life. And I think they have a fairly good chance of not hating their folx too much when they're teenagers.
And I think they have a fairly good chance of not hating their folx too much when they're teenagers.
Haha! No.
251: I agree that you can imbed those sorts of messages in your kids' psyche with repetition. But then that's getting away from the hard-to-raise topics.
You have to implement that, not state it outloud
Suprisingly and disturbingly often I'll hear a parent solemnly intone to their child something along the lines of "it's what's inside a person that counts".
Later that same parent, in front of the same child, will get incredibly and enthusiastically effusive about another kid's good looks, or make really snarky remarks about how someone is dressed or does their hair. I find it incredibly annoying.
What ages did you guys hate your parents? I don't think I ever hated my dad; my mom bore the brunt during middle school years, but it was pretty much over by the time I was 14 or 15.
With skeezy men
I think this choice of words hinders the discussion with kids.
You cannot give them the message to look for skeezy or evil men or women.
They have to look for the conduct.
When we tell them to look about for a certain type of person, we send them the wrong message.
I think skeezy is a word that describes conduct.
The thing I always worry about "talks" is that they're totally ineffective.
Making sure the kid really does feel comfortable telling you anything would seem to be a partial solution here -- the kid can bring stuff up on as he/she deals with it. Of course, talks are a way of opening the door to that sort of communication -- giving information but more importantly broaching certain tricky subjects.
I speak from a purely theoretical position, of course. My dad gave me a couple of super-awkward birds-n-bees talks the takeaway message of which was that masturbation was really wrong, and I pretty much never felt comfortable talking with my parents about anything I was going through.
I never hated my parents. well, I hated my step-dad, but I had lots of good reasons. it wasn't generalized 'no one understands me' stereotypical hating.
259: Hang on, Will. You're quoting me in 247, but acting like I'm making the opposite point that I was trying to make. I was trying to say that kids learn to read situations based on how you demonstrate reading situations, and that you can't sit down and have a talk about faceless skeezy men in the abstract.
Never hated my mom because, you know, southern boys and their mamas. My dad and I fought a lot but, for the most part, he just wasn't around enough for me to work up a good hate. This is probably abetted by the fact that I can't hold a grudge worth a damn. Once I blow up, it's over.
I hated my dad in my 20s (late bloomer). Then it got better, but now in therapy I'm working through some difficult feelings about both my parents. I think in my teens I just avoided having feelings about them one way or another.
This is probably abetted by the fact that I can't hold a grudge worth a damn.
You should work on that. There's nothing like a good grudge to suck all the joy out of your life.
I liked both my parents and never had any teen agnst or conflicts with them. But I was the eldest child, and the only one, I think, where the full-on 'anarchist' child-rearing had been in effect. There wasn't much for me to be kicking against -- parents who care about you, but don't try to do much in the way of imposing rules upon you don't really provide much ammunition for hatred.
Hang on, Will. You're quoting me in 247, but acting like I'm making the opposite point that I was trying to make.
That's some seriously skeezy behavior, will.
My mom took ballet classes with a number of girls in my middle school. When I was being uncommunicative, she would chat merrily about my classmates. Invariably, the ones she liked were extremely pretty and popular, and from time to time she would innocently ask me why I wasn't friends with them. I would just sit there and stare at my sandwich and feel this incredibly intense jealousy of those girls. The take-home message was definitely that thin, pretty popular girls were a hit with my mom, and I was a bit chubby at that age, and graceless, and probably as popular as the average Unfogged commenter. I would seethe with anger and jealousy and then lash out about something completely unrelated.
Around 14 or 15, I outgrew the age of Mom's ballet peers, and my middle brother went away to college and so I started getting plenty of other kinds of parental attention, and everything mellowed out.
I had a rocky relationship with my mother from teenagehood on, and still do, but it wasn't the classic teenage 'no one understands me' that resolves after the teenage years are over.
This is probably abetted by the fact that I can't hold a grudge worth a damn.
Me neither. And I don't think it's due to any higher-mindedness on my part or anything, it's just not the way my brain works.
re: 271
Ditto. Not through any conscious effort, it's just not how I work.
Being grumpy or unreasonable, sudden anger, etc yes. Grudges, no.
My mom took ballet classes with a number of girls in my middle school.
Like, they were studying ballet together in the same class despite the age difference? I don't know why but that strikes me as odd.
I've tried to keep a grudge. It's hard.
274: Look, Sifu, I've already apologized for making you participate in a group hug at UnfoggeDCon II. What else do you want?
You know, if you can't hold a grudge against a person, you can always try holding a grudge against an institution or other group, like, say, analytic philosophy. Or Theory. Or economists.
78
This is going to turn out like the Snow Crash discussion, isn't it?
Well, now that you mention it, I finished reading Cryptonomicon over the weekend (what with all that free time because my computer crashed), and I'm baffled by one bit of the earlier criticism. From minneapolitan's 85 in the previous thread:
It's within the realm of possibility that Stephenson had completed some kind of literary brainwashing on me by that point, and my understanding of the basic plot was compromised, but didn't the part at the end of Cryptonomicon where the good, capitalist-imperialist white people do something really, really disgustingly awful to the bad, imperialist non-white people strike you as a little bit racist?
(SPOILERS FOLLOW)
Maybe I'm brainwashed myself, but I don't remember this scene. The present-day thread ends with the good, capitalist-imperialist white people basically beating a Chinese general in a race, which I wouldn't call disgustingly awful. Near the end of the WWII thread there's a battle between good capitalist-imperialist white people and bad, imperialist non-white people. The non-white people were portrayed as lacking in discipline, but given that IRL someone was charged with war crimes for their conduct, I don't think it's particularly racist to include that portrayal in the story.
Sorry to bring up a dead, controversial thread again, but I'm confused. I'd totally agree that one-dimensional characters and straw-liberals are annoying, and I can see a bit of racism in the portrayal of the Japanese and maybe more than a bit in the portrayal of the rural Filipinos, but "The denoument is one of the most horrifically racist pieces of writing I've ever read" refers to a scene or scenes that I didn't understand as racist at all. Minneapolitan or whoever else read the book, did I completely misunderstand those scenes?
273: Yup. At the time, I was so busy being jealous of how my mom liked the other girls better, that I never thought much about if the girls thought it was weird that Mom was in their class or if it impacted their opinion of me.
And Re: hating parents, I don't think I ever did. I've never got along well with my mom, but it definitely wasn't as strong as hatred and it wasn't in a classic teenage "nobody understands me" way, like LB said.
You have to simultaneously attempt to make sure that your children have sufficient self-esteem, education, and awareness of the evilness of the world, yet try to let them be children.
Right. It sounds so simple.
I can't remember any talk having an impact on me, at least not compared to my parents' pervasive general unspoken attitude on the topic.
For years I had an absolutely terrific Ossie Davis quotation above my desk. I just googled all over the place and can't find it, so I'll have to hunt around when I go home. The gist was "Children don't learn from what you tell them. They learn by watching you as you interact with the rest of the world."
That is OVERWHELMINGLY true in my experience. If you want your kids to show good judgment when confronted with difficult, ambiguous, or potentially dangerous situations, you'd better darn well show it yourself. And then debrief -- thoroughly -- together afterwards.
Generally speaking my parents were excellent about this, but the one area that I absorbed way too much of the cultural mandate was "niceness." A significant majority of the creepy, unpleasant stuff I dealt with from grownup men was because I thought I had an obligation to be polite.
I don't think one-time talks are worth much -- I do have a certain faith in repetition.
Repetition, innoculation, and creating non-stressful times to have talks (suburban parents seem to like car rides).
Regarding grudges, I don't stay angry very long, but I certainly remember what the person did and try not to expect them to behave any differently the next time. In other words, it goes on your permanent record, but I don't lose much sleep over your black mark.
I see that this thread is working on finally living up to its title.
You know who is on my shit list forever? Fucking Pixar.
Generally speaking my parents were excellent about this, but the one area that I absorbed way too much of the cultural mandate was "niceness."
This is huge. Something I've been trying to formulate clearly enough to teach is a distinction between being 'nice' and being kind. I think there's a serious obligation to be kind, or at least not to be unkind. But the obligation to be 'nice' is a real problem -- that's the one where you find yourself in a situation where, e.g., you're twelve, and a twenty-something bookstore clerk is chatting you up, undercharging you for books, and eventually asking you if you want to see his band play, and you feel obliged to behave as if his attention isn't unwelcome.
277: I'm kind of interested in this as well -- while I read the book ages ago, and don't remember the ending in detail, it didn't set off any particular red flags for me. That could be culpable insensitivity on my part, but I figure if I missed something awful, I should figure it out.
In other words, it goes on your permanent record, but I don't lose much sleep over your black mark.
Sure.
In my experience people more inclined towards the grudgeholding end of the spectrum appear to feel that there must be some kind of accounting or atonement for the wrong that created the grudge. Its like for them the universe is out of balance because justice hasn't been done. And giving up on the grudge is like seeing a criminal get off scot free due to a technicality. Or something.
Like I said my brain doesn't work that way so I'm not sure I really understand what's going on in their head.
"Children don't learn from what you tell them. They learn by watching you as you interact with the rest of the world."
Heh. This past weekend I told Rory that I have a little crush on a guy who was at the wedding. She rolled her eyes, "Do you really have a crush, or are you just trying to model for me about relationships?" I think the correct answer was probably, "Yes, honey. I am trying to demonstrate for you how to be utterly ineffective in flirting so that you never, ever date boys."
re: 288
Yeah, it sometimes just seems like a wiring thing. I mean, I can rant for a few minutes and get really very angry, and some people just don't ever do that. It's not in their nature, and they can be a bit freaked out by people who do.
On the other hand, I've known people to stay angry with other people for crazily long periods. Not just long-term grudges, but actively angry with them for days, or even weeks. I don't even know how that's possible. It seems ... fatiguing.
In my experience people more inclined towards the grudgeholding end of the spectrum appear to feel that there must be some kind of accounting or atonement for the wrong that created the grudge. Its like for them the universe is out of balance because justice hasn't been done. And giving up on the grudge is like seeing a criminal get off scot free due to a technicality. Or something.
As a grudge-holder, I'd have to say this sounds pretty accurate.
I see that this thread is working on finally living up to its title.
A little scapism is fine, but eventually one has to face reality.
||
Sooooooooooooo much spit-up.
|>
"Do you really have a crush, or are you just trying to model for me about relationships?"
That's pretty awesome.
It seems ... fatiguing.
Yeah, this. Also, I don't think I have the necessary attention span.
I'm lousy at grudge-holding, but I get to 'dead to me' pretty easily. Or, not so much 'dead to me' as 'no longer counts as people'; I'll be civil, but there's a certain amount of bad behavior after which I really don't have any interest in what's going on in your head. I'll still try and figure people like that out for the purpose of avoiding unpleasant interactions, but not to care about them.
it freaked me out because I wasn't sure what was going on or if I was imagining it
A *hugely* important thing to teach all kids, I think, is to trust their instincts. If it seems like something weird is going on, it probably is.
I would say I don't hold grudges, and that's true in the sense that I don't generally carry around active anger or rage towards people. On the other hand, I'm willing to do rather a lot, even years after the fact, to make sure that somebody doesn't profit from their wrongdoings. So I have a long memory in that regard. Not actually sure whether you would call that grudge-holding.
(Naturally I am egotistically convinced that I can accurately classify their wrongdoing as fairly high-level, but since it's generally borderline criminal behavior, I haven't worked too hard to overcome that self-image.)
re: 296
I'm sure there are people whose behaviour could drive me to that, but it's pretty hard to think of anyone off-hand. Maybe one sociopath I worked with some years back.
I've had some pretty bad past relationships where the other person behaved pretty abominably, and where we are still fairly friendly.
299: This is for difficult co-workers and acquaintances more than anything else; I don't think I've ever moved someone from friend or loved one to 'dead to me'.
re: 298
That looks a lot like grudge-holding to me.
I don't think I've ever moved someone from friend or loved one to 'dead to me'.
I did that once, for a while, but man it's exhausting.
Yeah, the whole point of reacting to bad behavior that way is that it's not exhausting; it's a way of really not having to care at all about the person or what they do except insofar as it directly impacts you. Treating someone as if they were dead to you, when you really did care about them, would be terribly difficult.
I've tried to keep a grudge. It's hard.
Hate, like love, is an activity or a behavior rather than a feeling.
Can affects be willed? In any case, you can will hate, rage, anger. Many of us do do this, liking someone until a new piece of information comes to us. Can data cause hate? No, only a chosen response to new information
You can practice, exercise either. Just arbitrarily choose a stranger or public figure or close acquaintance and decide to love them, or decide to hate them. Imagine yjem strangling kittens, bi this shouldn't be necessary.
Hate, like love, can be unconditioned and unconditional. It's easy.
300: Co-workers? I'm trying to imagine what a co-worker could do to you (other than something brazenly inappropriate--sexual harrassment, etc.) that would justify "dead to me".
Unless you really meant it when you said "I get to 'dead to me' pretty easily". (You didn't like my brief? Dead to me. You wrote a shitty research memo? Dead to me. Standing too close with garlic on your breath? Dead to me.)
277: I assume the complaint is with Shaftoe going out in a heroic blaze of glory that is being fueled in part by bad, imperialist non-white people being burned alive, with neither the narrator nor Shaftoe taking the time to step back and examine the situation from an ethics standpoint.
Huh. Your lawfirm career has apparently been entirely free of backstabbing and abusive management.
I think the only person whom I have declared, without irony, "dead to me" in the twenty-first century is Gregg Easterbrook, for something he wrote about John Kerry in 2004 that I have since forgotten. It was pretty bad, though: disingenuous in the Easterbrookian mode.
On the other hand, I haven't spoken to one of my parents since the Clinton Adminstration, so, you know, every man his own unreliable narrator.
307: One of my colleagues is known to a small circle of current and former associates as "the backstabbing son of a bitch" or just "the backstabber" for short.
A *hugely* important thing to teach all kids, I think, is to trust their instincts.
Oooh, this. And also: That they aren't obligated to turn a suspicion into a Big Honkin' Deal if it makes them uncomfortable -- they can just fade into the woodwork. It's nice to say that you should be absolutely certain before you make an accusation, and that you shouldn't spread rumors -- and those things are true.
But not everything has to be a big, splashy, public accusation. A twelve-year-old can quit guitar lessons based on nothing more than "He just makes me feel really uncomfortable" and her parents ought to be able to trust her and back her up on that. Sometimes just removing yourself from the situation is the best you can do.
"The Backstabber" would be a good name for a serial killer.
310: Yes, right, exactly, you betcha.
I heard a great quote about resentment:
resentment is like setting yourself on fire and hoping the smoke bothers the other person
Any reading of Paul in Romans, or an understanding of ethics or religion or sprituality, should get this.
Love of family is unconditional. Caritas is unconditional. It is willed chosen accepted achieved.
And thus with hate. You don't hate "because." You are not angry "for a reason". Love and hate are not external events happening to someone else. Do we watch ourselves love and judge whether it is justified?
They are modes of will. Just do it. Just hate.
I'm the opposite of ttaM. I don't get angry in the moment, just bewildered. I'm pretty scared of other people's anger, because if I were exhibiting (any) anger, I'd be ragingly furious, nearing lack of self-control. So when I see angry people, I overestimate their fury. When I do get angry, I get more and more polite until I can leave.
I can hold grudges forever, though and I never forget anything. I prefer "dead to me", because that takes less energy. I'm trying to think if I've ever forgiven anything serious. Not really. If it was minor or excusable, I was over it right away. If it was a big deal, it is still a big deal.
and I never forget anything.
What song was playing the night we first met?
Sometimes I fling my cut-off nose at them.
You've heard it, though. The night we met.
311: Serial killers and backstabbing members of the learned professions share few qualities but vanity and venality.
315 is sort of like me. I tend to get super calm in heated situations and really angry only after I've mulled things over and decided that a genuine wrong was done. If I get angry in the moment it has to either be a simply egregious offense or a terrible misunderstanding on my part. The problem is that the terrible misunderstanding haunts me far more than any real injustice would, which is what drives the super-calm and detached approach.
Also, Re:313 - I heard it as "Nursing resentment is like eating rat poison and hoping the rat will die." This was particularly helpful to me during my divorce, as there were a number of rats who could have benefited from a little poisoning, IMO.
I can hold grudges forever, though and I never forget anything. I prefer "dead to me", because that takes less energy. I'm trying to think if I've ever forgiven anything serious. Not really. If it was minor or excusable, I was over it right away. If it was a big deal, it is still a big deal.
Do you mean not forgive unless they have somehow made amends / atoned for the transgression? Or are the things you're talking about such a big deal that they are literally unforgiveable to you?
306: I suspect that minneapolitan may believe that Stephenson invented the war against Japan in order to have an excuse to write about lots of Japanese people getting killed by Americans. Which would indeed be racist.
Fear or shame of the negative affects is obviously socialiation and domestification. Umm, not anyone here, of course. Whatever.
Perhaps not simultaneously, but in close sequence, people can hate and love, be kind to friends and cruel to enemies, and always have been so able. This fear that unless you are nice al the time you can never be nice again is just not empirically true.
Levinas is going to challenge this Nietzschean, I think.
315: See, this is just bizarre to me, though I run into it all the time, mostly in the context of "we're having this party, but we can't invite X if we invite Y, but if we don't invite Y, then Z won't come" et cetera. My reaction is always, "FFS, aren't we all adults here? Somebody seriously can't stand in a crowded room with somebody else? Seriously?"
I don't really understand grudges. I had a friend in college who had a short temper, and at some point got so angry with me over something that seemed kind of trivial that I fell into his "dead-to-me" category. Ran into him months later and he still seemed barely able to contain his rage. On the other hand, I can't recall ever being genuinely angry at anyone I actually know (as opposed to, say, George W. Bush) for any extended amount of time. Exasperated, yes. Dismissing people as assholes, yes. But not angry.
I tend to hold grudges almost indefinitely but I'm working on it. I am learning to acknowledge that time passes for other people just as it does for me so, really, the person who wronged/offended/whatevered me ten years ago just is not the same person and outside of extraordinary circumstances maybe I should let it go, y'know? However, I am someone who can quickly and easily move someone to "dead to me" status with repeat offenses.
To meld that with the other topic, yes, your kids will learn by example, not by words. My parents were very big on "you can tell me anything!" and "we'll never judge you!" and "it's what's inside that matters!" but their actions and expressed attitudes made it extremely clear that "anything" was actually a small subset of all possible topics and "never" meant constantly. Our relationship problems were obviously complicated/exacerbated by them being budding fundamentalists and me being a gay kid, and I do remember great times with my parents, but largely I remember hating them for all the little cuts and slants and now I hate them for the way those things have continued and the way the last ten years have seen them steer towards something like tolerance only to veer off into crazy Bible-thumping. Some days I'm pretty mellow about them and some days I really just despise them.
I would probably cut them off entirely but that would turn my sister into the referee and interrogation subject and I would much rather strike an unhappy balance of letting them have the impression that they're a part of my life without actually letting them have any control over when and how we interact than leave her to that fate.
326:
I agree completely. I just cannot be bothered to spend my energy on being angry with someone for very long.
Except essear, who is, of course, dead to me.
||
Time to walk the dogs. Do I wear my green shirt?
I don't know what is going on in Iran, but since my understanding of neo-Liberalism does put the urban creative classes in opposition to the proletariat and urban/rural poor I no longer automatically choose solidarity with students and young professionals.
A class consciousness in reflux. No green.
|>
Somebody seriously can't stand in a crowded room with somebody else? Seriously?
Completely seriously, there is no party I want to go to so bad that I would stand in a crowded room with my former best friend. I wouldn't get upset at the host or anything, but I'd find something else fun to do that night.
M/tch - such a big deal that they are unforgiveable to me. Although I don't know how someone who no longer exists in my world could atone anyway. What, the air would apologize to me? Mind you, I've only done this a couple (few?) times in my life, so it was for stuff I thought was egregious.
Anything less doesn't require atonement. I already figured out that she didn't mean to stand me up and was done with it by the time she called to check in.
"FFS, aren't we all adults here? Somebody seriously can't stand in a crowded room with somebody else? Seriously?"
But if I stand in the same room with X, without gnashing my teeth at / throwing things at / throttling him/her, then that would imply that what s/he did was okay! All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good people like me do nothing!!!
325: See, it's not bizarre to me. I was at an event recently which was attended by someone I really, really didn't want to see, someone whose very presence was discombobulating. Someone with whom I'd had many recent distressing interactions to the point where I actually dreaded seeing them. Now, I was trying to be a grown-up about it but it made things difficult, and the idea that I'd voluntarily attend something which was supposed to be fun while ducking around flinch-inducing person--I don't think so. This may merely be gender socialization (and while I'm all tough on the internet I'm extremely flinchy in person) but a big, big piece of achieving stable adulthood for me has been to internalize "you don't have to spend time around people who upset you, not even to make third parties feel happy and at ease". Anyone may know that I don't want to attend social events where Alarming Person will be. I don't expect my friends to pick sides, I don't think that Alarming Person is a moral monster...but dude, I'm not going to the party if I have to spend the evening figuring out how to avoid being baited for my beliefs and speech patterns in front of the group.
I like seeing
Frowner commentson the front page. It rhymes!
on Downer
That's not my dilemma. My problem is that I'm about 35% scared that if I interacted with my former best friend I'd start hitting her and I wouldn't stop. I think I could do damage, too. It would feel fucking excellent, but I don't need the hassle from the results of that. It seems real prudent to keep far far away from her.
The best case scenario is that I would see her first and leave inconspicuously, and that's not a best case scenario that I'm going to leave the house for. There are other parties and other places to be.
Although I don't know how someone who no longer exists in my world could atone anyway.
My impression is that she does indeed still exist in your world in a very present and visceral way, though, given the energy you seem to be putting into holding onto the grudge.
And I think that's usually the case when someone says "X is dead to me".
However, LB upthread seemed to be using it in a different sense, i.e. "I don't care about X and s/he doesn't merit the usual thoughtfulness, kindness that I give to people."
The thing about Apo's 325 is that, while it is completely reasonable for X to want to avoid Y, it is not reasonable for the host to spend energy on it. Invite who you want to invite, and X and Y will evaluate if thet want to attend.
306: [SPOILER] (if you can call it a spoiler when the object being "spoiled" is Cryptonomicon)
Yes, a whole bunch of Japanese people get burned alive, and we're meant to take some kind of libidinal pleasure in the fact. Now, don't get me wrong, the actual conduct of actual Japanese military personnel in WWII (and the run-up) was in many cases absolutely abominable and constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity. HOWEVER, in the case of Cryptonomicon's fictionalized WWII experience, we're supposed to feel that any brutality visited upon any Japanese person by the US is completely justified, and even praiseworthy, and it's supposed to get us off. That's what I'm reacting negatively to. Also, it's not as if the US was not guilty of plenty of war crimes in WWII itself, which is mostly elided by Stephenson's treatment of the war in his novel.
And with that I am done talking about Cryptonomicon forever.
Except to say that it sucks and I hate it forever.
Now I'm done.
333: I think all future post titles on Unfogged should be chosen such that they will rhyme with at least one commenter's name/pseud.
"I don't care about X and s/he doesn't merit the usual thoughtfulness, kindness that I give to people."
Right. This is no longer a person, it's a black box that's been known to lash out damagingly. Any thought devoted to it is devoted to minimizing interaction, and where interaction is necessary, minimizing damage. I don't think people generally figure out they're dead to me, although I suppose I wouldn't care if they did.
337: Skipping the easy "Cryptonomicon/Stephenson is dead to me" kicker? Admirably restrained.
No one inivte Cryptonomicon and minneapolitan to the same party.
But M/tch, the default state for the grudge is to exist and burn steadily. It would take energy to diminish the grudge.
We've been talking about this recently and that does remind me. But honestly, weeks and months go by without thinking of them. This has been a recent flare-up, most of which you guys have seen.
340: Admirably restrained.
Some of us.
But M/tch, the default state for the grudge is to exist and burn steadily. It would take energy to diminish the grudge.
See, this is incomprehensible to me. We must be wired completely differently.
I would hold a grudge against someone for as long as I thought they were feeling superiority and/or scorn whenever they saw me. Hopefully I would not hold onto it for so long that they would be surprised to hear I still had an opinion of them.
It would take energy to diminish the grudge.
This makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Did any pwning occur in 340, 341? And if so, who got pwnd? I can't tell.
I think all future post titles on Unfogged should be chosen such that they will rhyme with at least one commenter's name/pseud.
I look forward to a future "Run For The H/lls" thread.
333: It's too bad you missed the Grand-snipe midge-freight thread.
350: My favorite was the one about the people who were killed by a freak snowstorm.
337: "some kind of libidinal pleasure"? "supposed to get us off"?
Well, yes, if you read the Corregidor sequence and it gave you the horn, then you probably should feel fairly guilty about it, and I'm not surprised that you would feel resentment towards the author for making you experience feelings that you have been brought up to believe are wrong. A bit more self-examination might be a better idea, though.
I am ever grateful to the people here over the last few days. It was quite possible that I might have invested the effort in reading Cryptonomicon. Now I certainly won't.
Stephenson is dead to me.
My problem is that I'm about 35% scared that if I interacted with my former best friend I'd start hitting her and I wouldn't stop.
This also, for me, does not compute. Murderous rage carried on for so long over something that, while certainly a big deal for you, wasn't actually some heinous crime against you or your loved ones? It sounds so exhausting and unsatisfying.
hold a grudge against someone for as long as I thought they were feeling superiority and/or scorn whenever they saw me
I read somewhere that the person who wants revenge is the person who felt powerless. Revenge is for reasserting power.
344, 346 - No conviction.
315: I can hold grudges forever, though and I never forget anything.
Same here. I even remember other people's grudges for them, when they themselves have forgotten.
One of the experiences that helped me be less grudgeful was that a former friend in jr. high who had very callously and hurtfully betrayed me wound up becoming the preeminent stoner of our HS class. So much so that he basically ruined his life, his body and his mind with the drugs (meth and waaaaay too much acid for the most part.) It got to the point where I'd see him every year or so and he'd have sunk further and further into zombiehood. After he betrayed me, I had wished all sorts of horrible things on him, but man, he suffered so much worse than anything he deserved for his injuries to me. I hear that he's dried out, finally, but the guy basically lost his entire young adulthood in a haze.
350: Yeah, you were also all over that one about the drug-addled sorcerers.
I tried to read Hooptie-nomicon three different times, once getting as far as some nonsense about "chop-socky", but each time passing through the Three Stages of Dispensing with Cryptonomicon, to wit: Oh Shit, a Boy Genius; I Have Surely Reached the High Point, and It's a Joke About Anal Sex; and finally, It's, Like, World War II, Man.
306, 337: Ah, OK, thanks for clearing that up. I don't necessarily agree*, but I see where you're coming from at least.
338: If there's a thread named "virus," it came before my time, I guess.
* If anything, that scene seemed better about conveying that "war is hell" sense than most war scenes, both in that book and in general. That scene in Sweden or Finland where Shaftoe blows up a bunch of Nazis with a grenade launcher right after they get out of a car, then finishes off a few stragglers by hand? Now *that* was macho bullshit.
I even remember other people's grudges for them, when they themselves have forgotten.
Oh man. It doesn't happen often, but someone else holding a grudge on my behalf? Crazymaking.
It's like they feel obligated to maintain the grudge since I'm obviously shirking my duty to keep the universe in balance by constantly stoking my anger for, what was it again?
Also, it's not as if the US was not guilty of plenty of war crimes in WWII itself, which is mostly elided by Stephenson's treatment of the war in his novel.
Yes, war crimes like burning Japanese soldiers alive seem to be completely absent from the book.
353, 358: Sorry I brought it up. I liked it, but I'm well aware that the main reason was idiosyncratic. I wasn't trying to hype it in the thread a few days ago and I'm not now.
It's like they feel obligated to maintain the grudge since I'm obviously shirking my duty to keep the universe in balance by constantly stoking my anger for, what was it again?
My sil does this on my behalf for the weirdest, most random slights. Like the time my mom jokingly reprimanded me to brush my hair before I went out - she keeps that one in the tally, and I'm totally bewildered by that.
Okay, I finally worked out 357. But 350 still has me stumped. Deadly freak snowstorm victims that rhymes with eggplant?
You underestimate my self-absorption.
I wonder if I should refrain from commenting on the new post, just so Standpipe will realize I still hold a grudge against her/him Standpipe.
367: Ah. Duh.
You're dead to me now, LB.
Just wait until I post my crackling expose of the mountains where government informants hide out!
Although it does seem like good commentariat-fodder for a discussion of unreliable narrators. We take for granted that the socially-inept Lawrence Waterhouse is held up for derision, or at least some tongue-in-cheek humor. So, why do we assume that the author is endorsing the distasteful attitudes expressed in other scenes?
Go!
360: Cry, cry, give in to libidinal pleasure, cry.
Murderous rage carried on for so long over something that, while certainly a big deal for you, wasn't actually some heinous crime against you or your loved ones? It sounds so exhausting and unsatisfying.
What? It has only been seven years. I tried to get a Ph.D. for longer than that and that was even more fruitless and demanding. I have a huge capacity to trudge and wait. Decades, motherfuckers.
It was a big deal for me. It was a betrayal of a twelve year relationship, which is not me or a loved one, but as much as it was an entity that I loved, she broke that.
I don't think of her or talk about her much. I know that when I do, I sound intense. Although, you know, my heart isn't pounding or anything. I wish the universe would bring bad things to her but I don't do bad things to her myself.
There's no natural letting go (maybe, maybe some diminishing over time. Not so much that I'd choose to be anywhere she is. But the dreams of killing her have stopped.). I would have to work on acceptance or enlightenment or forgiveness for that to happen. That's one more task that I don't feel like doing.
(I also suspect that I'd be more nonchalant about all this if I had what I wanted - my own family. But that's not yet, so.)
someone else holding a grudge on my behalf? Crazymaking.
Huh. Interesting. Probably 90% (if not 100%) of my situations as described in 297 are on behalf of other people. Hey, you, person-in-power-who-needlessly-put-a-teenager-through-misery! *I* haven't forgotten! And if I can do anything to prevent you from having that kind of power over another vulnerable kid, I'm going to do it!
Yeah, probably I should work on that. Although, again, I'm not carrying it around as active anger. It just resurfaces when I find out that the person is going to get the Girl Scouts Service to Children Award, or something.
Frowner's 332 makes a great deal of sense to me, particularly this:
a big, big piece of achieving stable adulthood for me has been to internalize "you don't have to spend time around people who upset you, not even to make third parties feel happy and at ease"
I seem to be harboring something you might call a grudge against just one person, and while it shades into deep sadness much of the time, it can easily shift to anger (again). That's in large part because he refuses to acknowledge that he did anything wrong. Infuriating! Hurtful. We've therefore tacitly agreed to avoid one another. I'm bewildered by what he did; he's bewildered by my anger. No amount of explaining will resolve it, so it's just a crash and burn situation.
My problem is that I'm about 35% scared that if I interacted with my former best friend I'd start hitting her and I wouldn't stop. I think I could do damage, too. It would feel fucking excellent,
I'd really like to introduce you to my former best friend sometime, Megan.
376: We could film it as an homage to Hitchcock -- Strangers on a Blog.
And if I can do anything to prevent you from having that kind of power over another vulnerable kid
This sounds like something completely different from what I was referring to, and not really what I would call a grudge.
372: ...my own family
I find this construction so strange. I understand what is intended by it, but at the same time it seems to write off siblings, parents, grandparents, cousins, aunts and uncles...
I'll never have my own family in the sense meant by that phrase in the context of 372, but I am overjoyed by the family I do have. I realize that the term as used is part of the larger USAmerican pattern of not referring to things by name if they might imply sex or excretion, but it's a jarring usage nonetheless.
Is your former best friend fucking my ex?
(Although "was mean to my friend" is a big trigger for me. I have much less tolerance for that than I do for hurting me. I would give your former best friend a look of contemptuous dismissal on your behalf, but that's probably all I could work up.)
the default state for the grudge is to exist and burn steadily. It would take energy to diminish the grudge.
I think there's something to really strong emotions that gets wired more firmly in our brains than other memories. Someone betrays you really completely and painfully, the little neuropathways in your brain attached to that person become pretty powerfully linked up to your memory of really powerful emotional pain. eliminating the "grudge" almost requires you to completely forget that person exists such that if they ever reappear they can get assigned a new spot in your brain not linked up to that hot little core of undying hatred.
Is grudge-holding the flip side of being a fiercely loyal person?
Is your former best friend fucking my ex?
Nah, she just sold me out during the divorce, including lying to get me out of the house so her husband the real estate agent could go do a valuation on the place for purposes of the property settlement. (He came in $20-40K over the professional appraisers.) She also made a point of letting me know how my divorce was going to hurt her kid (my godchild) and her husband lectured me about not honoring my vows. Your look of contemptuous dismissal would be great, really -- they are the sort of people who could really stand to get the impression once in awhile that there are people who really don't like them.
I'm pretty much incapable of holding a grudge. Part of me suspects that it is in part a result of the fact that the people that have done the most fucked up things to me are family, and I have a deep-seated belief that it's necessary to come to terms with family members and accept them for who they are. (Obviously, not the case for other people, who may be terrified to be in the same room as an incestuous father or something, just speaking for myself). Of course, this also involves a long process of disentangling myself from them and realizing that while I can stand to be in a room with them for Christmas or go to coffee or whatever, I am no longer beholden to them in any way and don't have to continue worrying about them or what they think of me or what they might do to me because I can leave at any moment. (A hugely freeing realization).
I do still get angry at times when I realize the strange ways that these family members molded me as a child, but it's always in passing and I think it's part of the larger process of accepting and understanding who I am. (And hopefully making things better in the long run).
I suppose I just don't really get the long-running grudges, particularly when they seem to be about resentment for what someone else has. But I've never been a particularly competitive person (complacent is probably not far off from the truth).
Is grudge-holding the flip side of being a fiercely loyal person?
I wouldn't say so. I'm fiercely loyal to the people who matter to me.
I hated my dad from an early age--he was extremely verbally abusive/demeaning/dismissive, and on rare occasions physically abusive. That carried on until I was 23 or so--I was just beginning to arrive at the early stages of an adult relationship with him. Then he died. Then I felt guilty for six months or so about how much I'd hated him, had a three-day bender, and got myself into therapy.
My feelings about my dad are more complicated now than they were. Mostly I try to focus on not treating my kids/wife the way he treated his and realize that he probably went through a pretty tough time with his dad as well, and didn't know how to be a better parent.
Anyhoo, long way around of saying I know how to carry a grudge, and can easily do so for decades.
Is grudge-holding the flip side of being a fiercely loyal person?
If, by this, you mean the person who is fiercely loyal in friendship will hold a fierce grudge in the face of betrayal, then yes, I think so. If you mean that a grudge-holder is the opposite of a loyal person, then I think you are totally wrong. You must have meant the former, though, what with being always right.
Fiercely loyal is such a generous way to put it. Don't know about that, but I have monomanaical tendencies. I tend to do just a few things very intensely. I never dabble. Monogamy comes easy to me. Maybe the grudge holding is part of the same trait.
Speaking of loyalty, I don't mean to suggest that I don't credit the anecdotes that I hear, or that I am skeptical of professions of loyalty, or that I intend to "subvert" the patriarchal bourgeois concept of loyalty or whatnot, but have many people -- has anyone? -- had experiences where a person who made a "you hurt my friend/daughter/sibling/neighbor, I hurt you"-esque promise-threat actually carried out some sort of lex talionis reprisal? I have not, but I have lived a sheltered life.
Fiercely loyal is such a generous way to put it.
I was going to say obsessive, but thought it might offend.
I'm an excellent grudge-holder. Whenever someone else does something that seriously bothers me I remember it. If enough of those incidents pile up for a particular person, it becomes a grudge, and I hold it more or less indefinitely. It doesn't necessarily dominate my interactions with that person, and there are few if any "dead to me" people, but it's always there somewhere in the background. Pace the non-grudge-holders, this doesn't really take that much energy to keep up, although I'm sure not doing it would free up some energy.
I don't think I've ever moved someone from friend or loved one to 'dead to me'.
I've cut off contact with both of my parents (at different times). My father ended our period of non-contact by writing a letter in which he apologized for the issues which had led to me cutting him off in the first place, and now we have a great relationship.
My mother, I haven't spoken to in 10 years. Every so often she tries to contact me, always in ways that demonstrate that she's still engaging in the same behavior that led me to cut her off in the first place. I haven't spoken to anyone on that side of the family in 5 years (not that we were ever terribly close, except for my grandparents); I only found out that my grandmother had died when my mother contacted my father about it. A few months later, out of curiosity, I found her obituary online and discovered that I'd been written out of the family. Not terribly surprising (or painful for me).
392: I only found out that my grandmother had died when my mother contacted my father about it.
That is familiar. Every few years I am informed of deaths of people with whom I used to "celebrate" Thanksgiving and Christmas (cancer, overdose, etc.).
Wouldn't offend me. I know I'm my own caricature. And I trust you.
I've cut off contact with both of my parents (at different times). My father ended our period of non-contact by writing a letter in which he apologized for the issues which had led to me cutting him off in the first place, and now we have a great relationship.
This strikes me as extraordinarily healthy and perhaps a good example of the fine line between "grudge-holding" and "firm boundary setting."
I know some joyless people with a very strong sense of duty who are filled with loyalty and grudges. I'm sure that this rigid, barely-there personality is not the only way to trigger loyalty or vengefulness, but it's one recognizable type. The people who are loyal to me in this way I consider to be dangerous, not to be confided in or relied on in any long term way.
Mostly compulsive tidiers, come to think of it.
I'm a little confused by Megan's saying simultaneously that she holds a grudge against her former best friend, and that this friend is dead to her, hence, I would assume, no longer present for her. This may have been explained more fully upthread, but let me run with this.
With respect to the friend I described in 375, it sometimes occurs to me that my sadness at loss of his friendship feels very much like the sadness I feel about people who have died. Basically, we're never going to see each other again -- not because there's vicious hatred in place, but because we're at a loss for words.
So that is somewhat like his being dead ... well, not to me, but for me. Hm, I see I've drawn the distinction I needed. I am so very angry at this friend (who is still, ultimately, a friend insofar as I'd not refuse him a helping hand if he wanted it) in large part because he's caused me not to trust him any more. I haven't made a conscious decision to render him dead; rather, I'm speechless, without speech.
There was a point here, but I'm unable to make it out. Something about trust and loyalty, the betrayal of these being absolutely the worst thing anyone can do (lying, for example, is very very bad).
Hm. Eh, sorry.
394: Speaking of your caricature, you were specifically mocked in the 'First pull up then pull down' thread (not by me).
371: He made fun of liberal academics, so Stephenson delenda est.
I know some joyless people with a very strong sense of duty who are filled with loyalty and grudges.
This could so easily be me if I let it. My sense of duty so far outweighs my sense of self interest or even self preservation that I could quite readily erase myself in the service of $thing, with the only remnant of identity being a bitter hatred of $thing. Something I guard against now that I've identified it, but before I figured out what was going on there I had some really horrible relationships where I stayed because I promised I'd stay and I keep my promises, misery, loathing, and contempt notwithstanding.
I've written before about how hard it is for me to stop doing something. I have to figure out I don't like it anymore (I start to get the idea when I cry steadily on my way to and from each time) and then decide to stop and then stop. Every step of that is still really hard for me.
1. it is wrong for an adult to touch him or him to touch an adult
Did you put it that way exactly>, will? I mean I could see an adult who was coaching someone in rafting touch a kid. Or just tap someone carefully on the arm. It might be really hard to get this across to your daughter, but I'd think that you'd be able to be abit more nuanced with your son.
399: delendus est. Stephenson is masculine.
I'm my own caricature.
I've been thinking about this one too. Seems inescapable given stable personality traits and tics. In good years, the stable trait is an endearing constant (my grandfather could meow and bark accurately enough to confuse animals nearby). In bad years, clinging to any piece of personality seems indistinguishable from clinging to the problem.
Stephenson is masculine.
I think he's trying just a little too hard though, IYKWIM.
351: Waaah, cry me a river.
I don't understand what this means but I'm sure it's terribly clever and cutting, so I'll just go ahead and feel generally chastened.
362: well, quite. Not to mention the indiscriminate destruction of most of Manila by American (and Japanese) artillery, which is much more morally dubious - the soldiers in Corregidor were actually combatants.
400: My sense of duty so far outweighs my sense of self interest or even self preservation
That's me again. Not so much in romantic relationships, but in friendships, employment, volunteer commitments, family stuff -- I let people walk all over me. I try not to, I try to listen when people who care about me tell me to be assertive, but it just doesn't seem to take.
Absolutely last word on Stephenson: I think he has crap politics, and I have come to dislike his prose (mostly), but it's alright with me if other people feel they can read around the dubious parts, as I indeed do with SM Stirling. I don't need to inculcate any grudges right now, that's for sure.
407: inculcate s/b ingrudgulate
but it's alright with me if other people feel they can read around the dubious parts, as I indeed do with SM Stirling.
I must say that finding out you read those has made me feel much less guilty about them. It's really annoying that the type of adventure stories I'm dopily fond of has such a strong correlation with queasy-making politics -- I end up back at Jack London before I can think of a good leftist writing in that vein (and London's got a whole lot of problems himself).
410: Same here! Maybe we can collaborate on a series of leftist Hard Competent Man/Feminist Battle Maiden adventure stories.
Sounds like a plan. What about a sequel to The Iron Heel, set in the revolution against the oligarchs?
I'm a very easy forgiver, but when I worked in politics, I enjoyed holding grudges against people who had harmed my boss or had been rude to fellow staffers. There were a few lobbyists in particular who had pulled skeezy shit but for various finely weighed considerations, my boss continued to deal with them cordially. I put myself in charge of giving fuck-you eyes in the hallway and occasionally letting them know exactly why I didn't want to shake their hands. Eventually I'd be told to let up. It was satisfying, especially because in interpersonal relations I tend towards forgiveness & compassion.
||
God damn, the weather has been sucky for a week or so now. (Saturday afternoon was nice, and this Wednesday is supposed to be good.)
The gray puppy has returned.
|>
The gray puppy has returned.
Is this an actual dog I missed discussion of, or a metaphorical discussion of the weather. (Or, I suppose, in the spirit of Lincoln's 'black dog', a minor emotional depression?)
412: Awesome! Is that in the public domain yet? Or would we have to deal with London's estate? They would have to let me into grad school if I'd published a novel like that!
409-411: Glibertarianism and South Park Republicanism does seem to be overrepresented in fantasy and science fiction, doesn't it.
Try the 1632 series, by Eric Flint. Left-wing, maybe very left-wing, but not far-flung utopian with robots as benevolent dictators or whatever. (Synopsis: a small town from West Virginia gets sent back to Germany in the middle of the Thirty Years War. The committee of notable town residents that takes charge is led by the president of the local coal miners' union.)
397: It sounds to me like you very much still love this friend and sincerely wish things could be repaired. Megan, in contrast, does not seem even remotely to still love the ex-friend nor to wish things could be repaired. I like the "dead to/for me" construction as it does indeed capture the depth of grief from losing a friend. It falls apart for me, though, to the extent you might get occasional reminders that this dead-to-you friend is still very much alive. I would very much like for UNG to be dead-to-me, but it's hard to maintain that emotional positioning in the face of weekly dropoff/pickups and periodic tantrums about why the parenting agreement is unfair.
Huh. I think I've seen those, and haven't picked them up. I'll give them a shot.
412: Awesome! Is that in the public domain yet?
I'm pretty sure that Wrongshore's passive-aggressive glaring is licensed under a CC license, so feel free to use it, as long as you provide attribution.
periodic tantrums about why the parenting agreement is unfair
"Jesus H. Christ, even your mouldering corpse is annoying."
Double you tee eff? Did some troll comments get deleted? Maybe I'm just over-heated. Been mistreated. When will I be loved?
Yesterday I roasted a whole big pan of scapes, and the results were delicious.
What the hell are scapes? I had assumed some sort of PNW thing, but there they are in Cleve-Land.
I would very much like for UNG to be dead-to-me, but it's hard to maintain that emotional positioning in the face of weekly dropoff/pickups
Rory, I'm just going to leave you here in the presence of no one whatsoever. Nope. Nobody here but me and my daughter. See you Sunday evening!
422: The pre-flowering flower stalks of garlic plants. Delicious.
I believe scapes are like ramps.
had experiences where a person who made a "you hurt my friend/daughter/sibling/neighbor, I hurt you"-esque promise-threat actually carried out some sort of lex talionis reprisal?
Christ, frowner, do you think I would admit to this on the Interwebs?
And the promise is definitely a mistake. It is nice to imagine your enemies quivering in fear for years as they await your revenge, but they will forget soon enough, and to the extent they take you seriously they will try to stop you.
Better to smile, shake hands, and plot.
Better to smile, shake hands, and plot.
A bit of doggerel from my father's childhood:
Never let your anger show,
Nor strike your little friend a blow;
Better wait till you are cool,
And then half kill the little fool.
I also have to say, have to, how pleased I am to hear everyone on this grudgingly admit to how balanced, generous, and simply nice they themselves.
Long long threads of "I'm a nice person, too!" are my favorite form of entertainment.
Fuck you, bob. I'm angry and irrational.
Yes, wherever garlic grows, there grow scapes.
This is like those conversations
"And what's your biggest flaw?"
"My biggest flaw, my greatest sin, the worst horrible thing about me is...I let people walk all over me and don't assert myself enough!!!"
"You too! That's just me all over!"
418: LB, You can download the first two books of the series, namely 1632 and 1633, at the Baen Free Library.
I believe I may eat a big pile of roast garlic scapes this very night, alongside some tasty neep cakes.
I'm lazy, ill-tempered, snappish, ungenerous, and have bad posture, like a particularly unpleasant dachshund.
Try the 1632 series, by Eric Flint.
Yet another of those authors I wish I knew less about. I really should have spent less time on Usenet.
If you harvest the scapes, do the bulbs continue growing?
"And what's your biggest flaw?"
Probably the compulsive raping and murdering.
If you harvest the scapes, do the bulbs continue growing?
If you don't harvest them, apparently, they suck all the life out of the young bulbs. They're a (delicious) byproduct of the bulb cultivation process.
Awesome! I have a load of scapes out back! Yay! I can has scapes for dinner!
315: Again, Megan shows that she's in some ways uncannily like AB, who hates my briefly flaring temper, b/c she doesn't get that it flashes then burns itself out (usually) harmlessly. Whereas she holds more of a grudge against Bad Old GF for her behavior over the course of 6 months than I do for her behavior over 6 years.
BTW, sorry for this big catching-up comment dump.
437: Summarize, before I get attached to the guy?
I only see the scape harvesting mentioned with respect to hardneck varieties, but I think this is probably because they are the only kind that make scapes rather than just floppy leaves.
438, 440: Right. The garlic plant's natural strategy is to store up a lot of energy in its bulb, and then when it seems to be a propitious time to procreate, to draw on that energy store to send up a scape on which to produce flowers. By removing the scape before it flowers, you prevent that and the bulb remains plump and garlicious.
Are the scapes of wild onion worth eating? Because I noticed the other day that the wild onion in my yard has put up [what I now know to be] scapes, and they look just like garlic scapes (which I have purchased and eaten, but not known the name of).
Garlic scapes, which only appear on the finest hardneck garlic varieties, curl upward as they grow, ultimately straighten, and then grow little seed-like bulbs. When the garlic scapes are still in full curl, they are tender and delicious."
Russell, of Affinity Farm, predicts that garlic scapes will be ready around mid-June this year, but explained that because the scapes need to be pinched off about three weeks before the bulbs are ready to be harvested, the timing is "a bit of a gamble." A young scape makes one or two loops before straightening out, he said, so "as soon as it loops back around, we pluck it off. [This] sends more energy to making a bigger bulb and [the scape] is more tender."
433: My biggest flaw is that I'm too, like, in-your-face and totally tell it like it is and call people on their bullshit, and some insecure people just aren't strong enough to handle that.
441: Just to be clear, scapes are not the same as leaves. See the link in 425.
My biggest flaw is that I don't possess any scapes.
448, 450: Now talk about where you see yourself in ten years.
My greatest asset is that I'm not wasting your time with this interview, as I'm vainly attempting to forge a life of creative output and freelance income well outside of your steady payin', health-care providin' shackles.
Thing of all the blog-commenting you're not paying me for!
451: They'll try to make me go to rehab, but I'll say no, no, no.
My greatest flaw is my humility. I ought to really own my magnificence, you know? But I just can't bring myself to wear the cape and Elvis-in-Vegas jumpsuit all the time.
Just for the record, bob, I don't think that saying that I have an explosive (albeit brief) temper is precisely self-congratulatory.
We had a grudge-related thread a month or so ago. I know that I mentioned this girl from HS against whom a nurse a pseudo-grudge. Weirdly, I can't find that thread, but I can find where I made reference to her (in googleproofed form) a few days later in another thread. Not important, just weird.
All this grudge-holding and ex-best-friend stuff just seems utterly alien to me. I have friends I just don't see much anymore, or from whom I've drifted apart, but I don't think I've ever had ex-friends in the sense Megan describes.
I do wonder if that's quite gendered, in the sense that all of the people I know who have that kind of relationship with a former friend are women; it's that quasi-romantic intensity of friendship that seem reasonably common among women/girls of a certain age but rarer, although obviously not unknown, in men.
This was an interesting thread, because of my growing daughters, and because I am currently ignoring a once-close friend.
My eldest is 12 1/2 and could pass for older, and I had never thought of warning her about older men. I'm not sure I will yet, she's incredibly unselfconscious so far.
As for the friend ... she is an internet friend who became a very good friend. We're not so close now, she has annoyed me in countless little ways over the years, but our children love each other (my 6 yo and her 7 yo have had a totally intense best friendship for 5 years) and I had thought that we would always be connected. Recently we were having an on-off, protracted and public debate ... she annoyed me, I was snarky, and she completely flew off the handle, was insulting and dragged in various private and irrelevant issues. I had my very own "the lurkers support me in email" moment, and it was rather odd.
I have ignored her since then - don't read her twitters, don't read her blog, haven't responded to anything she's written anywhere. Did speak to her when I bumped in to her at something we were both attending and it was impossible not to. (I am not the first person who has cut off all contact with her.)
But I kind of feel like I have to decide whether to keep it up - in which case my children will be extremely upset - or what to do. I don't want her in my house again, and I'm certainly not visiting her, but I feel bad for my 6 year old.
ttaM, is there no circumstance in which you can imagine severing a friendship? Is it hard to imagine that a betrayal would happen, or hard to imagine staying mad about it?
Actually, I understand better how to stay friends with an ex-boyfriend than with an ex-friend. It is really hard to break up with friends because it isn't supposed to ever happen.
Well, I've just recently been definitively ex-friended by someone because of an Unfogged comment.
Turns out collegebestfriend's fiancée (referred to as his girlfriend in that comment) reads Unfogged. Enough to know who I am.
(Hi, K! Still reading?)
Asilon, I suspect your children will forget soon enough if it's left more or less "oh, I don't know when we'll see X again" rather than "we're ner seeing X again because X and Mommy had a big fight.". You can't put yourself in the position of feeling hostage to this friendship "for the sake of the kids.". 6 is a pretty adaptable age.
459: I know there are people from my 'burg (and expats of) who read Unfogged. Some of them must know who I am. I'm amazed I haven't been unfriended by certain people about stories I've disclosed here.
I do wonder if that's quite gendered, in the sense that all of the people I know who have that kind of relationship with a former friend are women; it's that quasi-romantic intensity of friendship that seem reasonably common among women/girls of a certain age but rarer, although obviously not unknown, in men.
I think the male estranged friend I've been describing qualifies as, well, a male who has a former, or really just estranged, friend, i.e. me. I will say that he didn't choose the split himself, at least initially. I did. So there's that.
Of course, the kind of thing I've been somewhat ineffectually describing is apparently not like the situation Megan describes.
it's that quasi-romantic intensity of friendship that seem reasonably common among women/girls of a certain age but rarer, although obviously not unknown, in men
Huh? Are you just referring to emotional intimacy?
459: Oh, god, Blume. You said that? About her? And, uh. Oh, man.
461: Given the harshness of my comment, I can't really find fault with the ex-friending. But nor do I feel particularly bad about having been so harsh. "Eavesdroppers never prosper" seems an appropriate adage to invoke here.
I feel weirdly in the middle on this, because there are essentially no friendships or romantic relationships that I feel this way about. It's basically all indirect or professional relationships, as described above.
Oddly enough I may have acquired a new one just today -- a doctor who told an upsetting and potentially dangerous lie to a teenage patient. Not only will I never refer anyone to this doctor, but if I had any way to file a complaint against them, I would.
Well, I've just recently been definitively ex-friended by someone because of an Unfogged comment.
Well, as they say, if you're going to get caught you might as well make it count. You certainly did.
456: My other theory on this is that men can apparently stop speaking to someone entirely and still maintain that they are friends...
And, uh. Oh, man.
This was pretty much my reaction. Bridge incinerated: in an instant! But again, I'd feel worse if I didn't get the distinct impression I was being webstalked.
Not only will I never refer anyone to this doctor, but if I had any way to file a complaint against them, I would.
Surely there's a regulatory/licensing body you could report to? Did you correct the teen's information?
You can't file anonymous complaints, and the patient would be harmed far more by having this out (she's a minor, her parents would have to know) than would be worth it.
But to the more important question, yes, the patient now has correct information and reliable adult resources to go to in the future.
re: 458
Sure, but it's never happened. It'd have to be something pretty heinous, and it just wouldn't manifest itself in that way.
There is also some truth to 468.
re: 463
No, I'm not. There's an intensity to certain female friendships -- particular people in their teens and twenties -- that is almost entirely absent from male friendships in the same age group and that intensity is sort of orthogonal to intimacy. It's by no means universal -- I have female friends who, apparently, don't have that kind of intense dramatic friendship, either, but it does seem quite gendered.
Via another comment in the thread linked in 459, I see that the age of consent in NM is 16 (although the bit of the statute quoted looks pretty ambiguous about whether it's actually 16 or 17), whereas in Virginia it's 18 and the statutes are quite strict and unambiguous. So.
I don't want her in my house again
Ooh, yeah, this is a powerful feeling. I've lived a sheltered enough life that I first experienced betrayal* just a couple of years ago. Totally sucker-punched. And my first response was, "But you've been in my home! And I've fed you!" That made everything much, much worse. Really weird.
*Well, betrayal that was obvious at the time, as opposed to the slowly dawning realization of just how bad one college relationship had been.
471a: On the one hand, that makes perfect sense. On the other hand, it totally sucks!
ex-friends in the sense Megan
Not people I hate in the sense of needing to separate to avoid harmful rage, but definitely a willful complete cutting-off of contact, two of them formerly close. Not dramatic friendships, but people I really rather liked, which doesn't happen that often.
475: Right. It's entirely fair and appropriate that doctors know the source of accusations against them. On the other hand, where you know the hammer of vengeance is going to disproportionately punish the reporter, you end up giving advice to people along the lines of, "Well, these are the benefits and costs of reporting it, and this is what could happen if you *don't* report it...." and then if it doesn't get reported, you're left with only extra-legal means* of preventing future victimization. Bleargh.
*No, I am not a vigilante and do not endorse such.
It'd have to be something pretty heinous, and it just wouldn't manifest itself in that way.
I believe you, but can I ask you some more questions about it? Assuming something triggered your threshold (and I hope nothing does), what would you DO? I am only guessing, but would it look something like:
Finding out.
REALLY MAD!
Throwing shit and stalking around.
Maybe a confrontation, or maybe not. With SHOUTING!
And then, like, what? Presuming it was something that did get to you, after a while you'd see something shiny and start thinking about that? Kinda forget, think about dinner. Run into the person, remember you were MAD! Do that a few more times until eventually you guys would shoot pool again?
I don't get that. You and I may have different thresholds for what would trigger a hostile severance, but presuming something hit your threshold, can't you imagine staying mad forever? If you can do that for something super extreme, then we're just talking about being different amounts of touchy, not about whether there's a type of person who holds grudges or not.
And my first response was, "But you've been in my home! And I've fed you!" That made everything much, much worse.
Yes! The day that the ex-friend's husband prepared the valuation that could have screwed me out of $10-20K? I bought the entire family dinner that night. For his birthday. I got the email with his report while the godammed sushi was still in my belly! Injury, let me introduce you to insult.
472: huh. Well whatever that odd intensity thing is of which you speak, I don't think it's significant in the ex-friending dynamic.
Blume, sorry about the ex friending -- you don't sound overly broken up, but I imagine it still kinda sucks.
469: I'd feel worse if I didn't get the distinct impression I was being webstalked
That is curious. I carry on here with a fair amount of confidence that no one I know in real life knows that I comment here -- aside from real-life people I already know about. This is exceedingly important.
Yes, wherever garlic grows, there grow scapes.
False! Not all garlic varieties put forth delicious scapes.
I only see the scape harvesting mentioned with respect to hardneck varieties, but I think this is probably because they are the only kind that make scapes
See?
My hardneck can't cover up my red scapes.
re: 478
I'd imagine I'd be mad for a while, and then ... not. That usually manifests itself either as a rekindling of friendship and smoothing over of old wounds or just a severing of contact with little or no emotion. The anger doesn't remain. That's certainly been the model with the end of romantic relationships, in some of which I've been pretty treated pretty badly indeed.
I've never ever been 'mad forever'. I can imagine utterly heinous situations where that might hold true, but, emotionally, it's pretty remote. It's not a sensation I've ever experienced.
The distinction between people who have a low threshold for grudges and people who have a high-threshold for grudges just is the distinction between people who hold grudges and people who don't. It's sophistry to try to claim that those who have a very high-threshold for grudges are just the same. Sure, in theory I might well 'hold a grudge' but in practice I don't. I'm pretty comfortable as a result, with describing myself as someone who doesn't hold grudges.
So, to go back to your quote:
Presuming it was something that did get to you, after a while you'd see something shiny and start thinking about that? Kinda forget, think about dinner. Run into the person, remember you were MAD! Do that a few more times until eventually you guys would shoot pool again?
Yeah, pretty much exactly like that. Only I can't ever remeber really being mad with someone I wasn't in a romantic relationship with, or otherwise related to, for longer than a few days. The half-life of anger, for me, is very short indeed.
re: 479
472: huh. Well whatever that odd intensity thing is of which you speak, I don't think it's significant in the ex-friending dynamic.
Really? You don't recognize it? Odd. It seemed damn near universal among my female friends in their teens/early-twenties, either that, or you aren't noticing how different male friendships in that age group are and are assuming they are basically the same.
483 pretty much gets it exactly right in describing me too. The very thought of staying "mad forever" for anything short of serious and violent crimes just doesn't have any resonance.
In a situation where what causes the anger keeps happening, e.g. an annoying neighbor or cow-orker one can't readily escape from any time soon, I can see the anger constantly being rekindled, but that's different from staying mad at someone for something that happened long in the past.
I hold a grudge against Eric Flint on behalf of James Schmitz. And because of that interminable thread.
(Actually, I rather like the 1632 books.)
It just ... goes away. By itself.
You wouldn't have to work on enlightenment and read about forgiveness and reluctantly decide that there is spiritual and moral and health case for forgiveness and besides that is in accord with what you would like your higher self to do? And then begrudgingly begin the work of checking yourself when you rehearse your rationalizations in your mind and stew? You wouldn't have to dissolve a whole big knot of resentment and fury that settled in your chest and probably gets reinforced when you chat with all your other girlfriends who totally support you because they never really liked her anyway?
It just goes away, easy as pie. Yum, pie is tasty. Look! I'm not mad anymore!
I don't get it. Sure, I'm totally like that about stupid shit (which can go pretty far, because I'm mellow). But once I'm mad, I mean it.
414: I thought that was Churchill's black dog (check the tags?) -- and I think I introduced the gray puppy of ennui to the mineshaft a couple years back.
482: I recognize what Matt is talking about.
You wouldn't have to dissolve a whole big knot of resentment and fury that settled in your chest and probably gets reinforced when you chat with all your other girlfriends who totally support you because they never really liked her anyway?
There's no probably about it. Having frequent grievance recital sessions with friends definitely reinforces the hurt/anger/etc. There's talking through things, but there's also getting stuck and wearing the rut deeper and deeper.
You wouldn't have to work on enlightenment and read about forgiveness and reluctantly decide that there is spiritual and moral and health case for forgiveness and besides that is in accord with what you would like your higher self to do? And then begrudgingly begin the work of checking yourself when you rehearse your rationalizations in your mind and stew?
No, not really. I just think about the person and the event less and less as time goes by and sooner or later it just doesn't mean much to me. The person in question is still filed under "asshole", but thinking about them doesn't engender anger anymore or visions of pummeling them.
You wouldn't have to work on enlightenment and read about forgiveness and reluctantly decide that there is spiritual and moral and health case for forgiveness and besides that is in accord with what you would like your higher self to do? And then begrudgingly begin the work of checking yourself when you rehearse your rationalizations in your mind and stew? You wouldn't have to dissolve a whole big knot of resentment and fury that settled in your chest and probably gets reinforced when you chat with all your other girlfriends who totally support you because they never really liked her anyway?
No, we're boys. Slam a few doors, stomp around for a bit, punch a wall. Okay, shouldn't have punched that wall, but aside from the throbbing hand, I'm starting to feel bett-- Ooh, look! Football season started!
re: 487
Yes, it just goes away. Not even really any need for active work at 'forgiving'. I do tend to be a fairly forgiving person, and can usually construct reasons why people might have done heinous things, but I think this is quite independent of the emotional response. I'm angry, and the I'm not. There's no sense that I need to make any effort for that transition to happen. It just does.
For what it's worth, I can get stupidly angry over trivial shit -- it's not that I'm some paragon of emotional rectitude or something. It's just that grudges/long-term anger/festering, etc doesn't happen. In fact the initial burst of anger tends to have the effect of near-instantly curing the 'big knot of resentment and fury'.
probably gets reinforced when you chat with all your other girlfriends who totally support you because they never really liked her anyway?
My friends would think it utterly weird if I were to have this sort conversation with them. I suspect they'd be a little embarrassed for me and think I was losing it.
And, on preview, what Mitch says.
I do tend to be a fairly forgiving person, and can usually construct reasons why people might have done heinous things, but I think this is quite independent of the emotional response.
I do this too, but as ttaM said it's not really in order to talk myself down out of anger. I don't even do the shouting / stomping / doorslamming / wallpunching stuff. I just feel pretty intensely angry for a while and then it start dissolving.
Megan: so, you aren't like me?
Everyone else: nope.
Megan: really?
Everyone else: yep.
Megan: but you agree that NorCal is tops, right?
This thread really gets to me because I've been in the midst of an ex-friending episode for several months. That is has been several months is my fault; although I'm the de-friender, forgiveness comes easily and I'm not used to this role. Periodically, something will bring the ex-friend to mind completely outside the context of the Precipitating Event, and I'll have a little "aw" warm-fuzzy moment... until the memory of the Precipitating Event comes back and the warm fuzzies are washed away by grief and rejection. I've sort of kept the struggle between the two impulses alive, because we were close enough that I almost feel a familial obligation not to give up on the warm-fuzzy parts. But the irresolution is driving me crazy, and at this point I'm basically accepting that the emotional reality for me is what it is, and continuing to fight it is counterproductive. So I'm trying to let go, but it feels awful, especially because the ex-friend has made some gestures toward reconciliation. But... they weren't very good gestures, and the PE was a pretty big PE.
I'm like Megan. At least in this respect.
OK, lets try this. I am this kind of mad at two people in my life.
In sixth grade, my former close friend Laura Glass decided to climb the social hierarchy and started by shitting on me. I think it was a conscious plan of hers.
My former best friend and my ex, which I considered a betrayal (although other people here wouldn't count it the same way).
The sixth grade one cost me two full years of the most complete ostracism short of kid bully beatings. The second one also took me about a year to recover from. It sounds all melodramatic, but I said at the time that it cost me nearly half my soul. I've never grieved so hard for anything else.
OK, whatever. I played a role in that and I'm the one who built the stories around them. But, you guys both have a "violence or serious crime" exception, but in my girly middle class life, this is as much harm as I'm likely to encounter. In what aspect of my life am I more vested? I honest to god wouldn't get this mad over a personal mugging. I'd laugh about vandalism. This stuff is the realm where serious hurt can happen.
Really? You don't recognize it? Odd. It seemed damn near universal among my female friends in their teens/early-twenties, either that, or you aren't noticing how different male friendships in that age group are and are assuming they are basically the same.
I'm coming to the slow realization that I'm not actually female. I have some idea of the dynamic you speak of, but it's not typical of most of my female friends. And completely not even close to the dynamic of the one woman I hold my undying grudge against. (I can imagine not being mad forever, but I can't imagine ever seeing her again and not instantly remembering my anger.)
See?
How right you are--truly, I claimed too much and thought too late.
I can get stupidly angry over trivial shit [...] In fact the initial burst of anger tends to have the effect of near-instantly curing the 'big knot of resentment and fury'.
This exactly, like a cork popping. Once the pressure's released, it's usually gone.
493: Heh. But in this case what Megan describes seems to actually be common enough among commenters here and people they know that I don't think a project to label it m-anger will be successful.
On the other hand, setting fire to someone's couch and throwing it off their roof might be a pretty effective way to dissolve a whole big knot of resentment and fury that settled in one's chest.
493: It usually takes me a few more queries before it sinks in. The first couple answers have got to be jokes.
318: Sure, it was that song by King Missile, "Detachable Proboscis"
Really? You don't recognize it? Odd. It seemed damn near universal among my female friends in their teens/early-twenties
Data point: In 99.5% of the cases where I've observed this dynamic, it's been female/female friendships. However, probably no more than 20% of the women I've known have exhibited this trait.
I think it's partly social-circle and class and subculture-specific. That intensity of feeling is permitted (and the dramatic unwinding thereof is expected) more in some contexts than in others.
re: 496
I had a relationship that broke up in my late teens that pretty much destroyed me emotionally for a long time. Certainly years [not being melodramatic but it totally fucked me over]. Nevertheless, within a few months of the relationship ending we were friends. We were part of the same social circle, and drank in the same pubs, and ... meh... it just seemed stupid not to be friendly.
I just don't really recognize the sort of social/personal dynamic you are talking about. I mean, I've seen it. I can understand it intellectually, that people can be so hurt that they never get over the slight, but it's just not something I understand subjectively, in terms of my own first person experience.
491: My friends would think it utterly weird if I were to have this sort conversation with them. I suspect they'd be a little embarrassed for me and think I was losing it.
Heh. I embarrass myself with my going on about the lost friendship I've mentioned. Get over it! Why can't you get over it? And that's just it: I don't know. A couple of friends have patiently heard me out about it, but I know that I'm the only one who cares terribly much whether so-and-so, estranged friend, is actually an asshole.
re: 504
That might be right in terms of numbers. As I said above, I certainly know plenty of women who've never been in that sort of dynamic, and I'd imagine there's a selection bias. You notice the people in the histrionically intense friendships a lot more than you notice the ones who aren't.
496: I'm just saying it's really foreign to me, and not the way I experience hurts like you're talking about at all. I'm not trying to belittle the pain you've experienced. I just experience and react to the effects differently
For example, still being mad at the people who bullied me in middle school just would never occur to me. To me it would feel like giving them continuing power over me.
I believe your self-reports, ttaM, M/tch, Apo. But I don't see how I could feel like that.
I hold a grudge against Eric Flint on behalf of James Schmitz. And because of that interminable thread.
Yeah, LB, this is what I was referring to. Flint's nowhere near as odious as St/rl/ng, he's just an incredible asshole.
I'm having trouble determining whether I fall on the grudge or the !grudge side of the fence because I cannot seem to recall a time when I have been severely wronged by someone in my personal life or have gone through a dramatic unfriending process. I suppose this could either be evidence that I do tend to forgive and forget, or simply that I just don't get out much. There is one friendship about which I tend to stew about from time-to-time, because I've felt at times like the other party in the relationship doesn't value me as much more than a sounding board for her problems, but my reaction to those thoughts is simply, "Well, maybe this is a sign that this friendship wasn't as real as I once thought, so why sweat the departure of what seems to have never been there?" But yeah, have I really never been stabbed in the back by a friend? Perhaps.
With respect to my professional life, however, there are some incidents that happened over a year ago about which I can still get angry, plot elaborate off-tellings of the person(s) in question, etc.
I'm exactly like ttaM, M/tch and Apo. By the time I'm done telling the person that I'm angry, the anger is over.
Now, though, if said person is not immediately within reach, I can keep the anger going for awhile. I mean, at least hours. But again. As soon as they're in front of me and I've said my piece, poof. This actually often works against me in some situations, particularly protracted arguments, because I just don't have the will to carry them on and then "lose."
Reviewing Megan's situations, I'm glad for it, though.
I understand the entirety of John not-Quincy Adams' 494, particularly we were close enough that I almost feel a familial obligation not to give up on the warm-fuzzy parts.
It's tough to decide to walk away from someone who's making conciliatory gestures, but yeah, if that's your emotional reality, well, you're possibly hurting yourself by denying it. I don't know.
I wasn't going to "me too" until nosflow decided to get all Mocky McMockenheimer, but I'm in the Megan/Teo camp here. I'm really slow to anger, but once I'm there the only thing that's going to get me un-angry is removal of the original reason for anger, which is often not possible, what with the unshitting of beds and all. Part of it is some kind of defensive rationalization of the perceived failure of self control in getting angry in the first place, but part of it is the fact that I'm right dammit, and there's no reason to back down when your right.
I wasn't going to "me too" until nosflow decided to get all Mocky McMockenheimer
He's dead to you.
I had a few relationships where I was really invested in the "everything is great!" motif, and then after we broke up I slowly got quite angry at a lot of bullshit that I had willfully turned a blind eye towards at the time. And there was no good way to tell the person off anymore. Those types of anger took me a lot longer to shake off than situations where I've been able to address what hurt me.
In other words, I'm somewhere in the middle.
(Or, I suppose, in the spirit of Lincoln's 'black dog', a minor emotional depression?)
LB, I had to leave just after I made that comment and couldn't respond to your question.
Your final supposition was right. The answer, as with so many things, lies in the archives. I think that the grey weather was a strong contributing factor, though.
I had a very close friend six years ago, an immediate BFF after I moved to NYC, with whom I did everything. She was really aggressive about our friendship, calling several times a day, going to great lengths to see me whenever she could. We were tight, and she and I both talked about how odd it was for us to find someone we so immediately bonded with.
Some events occurred, some of which I've considered to have become part of this giant narrative I sculpted for myself about why, quite suddenly, she stopped wanting to see me. Like, she completely cut off contact. I cried and cried about it, tried to contact her, felt terrible about all these things I decided I'd done wrong, etc.
After about four years of solid silence and polite hi-saying, she recently invited me out to drinks. She told me all these things I hadn't known about what had happened to her in the interim. There wasn't like an "I'm so sorry I let our friendship go" or a "You did these things that pissed me off." And I even knew, factually, about the things she told me that night, but I didn't know how ashamed she was about them, and she didn't want me to know because she felt so embarrassed.
But still, her narrative about why we weren't friends for four years wasn't about anything I'd done (which I blamed myself for, getting too close to her husband at an emotionally critical moment in their relationship) or about anything she'd done (these things she had been ashamed to talk about), but that she'd only recently moved back to Brooklyn and she'd gotten lazy about staying in Manhattan during the interim.
It was weird.
I am pleasantly full of a dinner which heavily featured the aforementioned roasted scapes. Their texture is succulent and surprising.
There are certainly people who I used to be close to who hurt me or angered me enough that I no longer have any interest in spending time with them, but it doesn't feel much like holding a grudge. But no one has really fucked me over. People have done things that sucked a lot, but no one has ruined my marriage or told lies that destroyed my career or killed someone I love or accused me of a terrible crime I didn't commit.
As far as the other people go, either the prospect of seeing them simply never comes up (conveniently the case with the one person I am thinking of who really did something pretty awful to me personally), or it does and it turns out that they are just a distant acquaintance now, or it does and they remind me that wow, I sure do find them horrid, and I go talk to someone else.
And yeah, I'm in the middle too. There are people who have done things that build up and then there's a final straw and I realize how bad they've always been to me and I just can't tolerate them anymore because the love that I used to forgive them is gone. Then there are people who I just need some time away from and we're eventually perfectly civil, or even friends with, again.
In the former category is the guy I mentioned in 186. He and I were brothery-sistery after he took my virginity (I know, weird) for seven years before I was like, Jesus fucking Christ I can't love anyone enough to put up with the shit you put me through you vain selfish domineering ass. I've seen him since I cut off our relationship and felt no desire to resume that friendship.
In the latter category is the woman who I was very intimately close friends with until she spent six months trying to seduce my boyfriend and, when he finally kissed her at my birthday party (I know, weird), she called the next day to say she'd always known he was more attracted to her than to me, and that he was probably a rapist. I can be perfectly pleasant and even friendly to her five years later.
The difference is, I think, that I tolerated this guy because I felt so much love for him, and resented how much he abused my generosity and adoration. With her, I can just see, damn, she was really fucked up at the time and terrified that her beauty wasn't omnipotent. Both of them were vain and destructive. But she had grown when I saw her again; he hadn't. So to me, it doesn't feel like my grudge is eternal, but that I can change how I feel about who a person is, given new evidence. If no new evidence is offered, I have to go back to keeping way clear of this dangerous person.
OTOH, love is really really stupid IME. And when it's gone, I look back and say, WTF was I thinking, offering so much of myself to anyone? Hence, intimacy issues.
483 pretty much gets it exactly right in describing me too. The very thought of staying "mad forever" for anything short of serious and violent crimes just doesn't have any resonance.
I knew somebody who was incredibly committed to prison reform and re-entry programs whose father had been murdered. I don't think that he was angry at the killer anymore. So, for some people it is possible stop being angry even over violent crimes.
Mostly, I think I am very very lucky that more people I knew in my youth aren't more interested in holding a grudge. (Perhaps some are and I have no idea.) I was an ass to many.
And people, please not to fuck with me. The black dog is Samuel Johnson's.
||
OT: ttaM's mention of Speech DeBelle the other day officially makes him my BFF as of this moment. I've got sunshine coming out my speakers. It's awesome.
|>
Grudges and un-friending. I've grown apart from people but have never deliberately un-friended any close friends. There are people I've been close with whom I've alienated with my tendency to get wrapped up in my own shit and to be inconsiderate about the little things, and occasionally about the big things. One close friend in particular who lives on the West Coast now was a friendship I fumbled entirely from my side, on account of having been largely absent from the friendship during a period of bereavement when he really needed someone. That's one I still feel shitty about.
Another close female friend I know I deeply hurt by being unable to attend her wedding (I was out of town at the time but could have contrived not to be). I feel shitty about that one too -- and about the lame, insulting excuse I proffered -- but OTOH I was sort of in love with her and the thought of watching her marry someone else made me want to slit my wrists, so there isn't much that can be done.
I've quite deliberately un-friended a couple of ex-girlfriends, but I don't do the "let's just be friends" thing anyway, it's just that they're the only ones I'm no longer friendly with when I see them. Neither of those do I regret.
I'm definitely on the grudge-holding end of the spectrum, but compared to the sorts of things other people have brought up I don't really have anything in my past over which I hold really serious grudges. It's all pretty trivial stuff that doesn't actually have much effect on most of my day-to-day interactions with people. (No unfriending, etc.)
I do still think it's part of the grudge-holding mindset, though. I can definitely imagine ending up cutting off all contact with someone who did me serious harm or betrayed me in some important way. It just happens that nothing like that has yet happened in my life.
Esther Summerson is pretty damn annoying.
528: Yes. But I think that's because she's clearly crazy.
523 - I'm actually a huge fan of victim reconciliation, because talking to the guy who hurt me helped enormously. (Not through a program, but we were still acquaintances.) But even him I wasn't MAD at. He wasn't thinking or paying attention to me, but he didn't knowingly betray me. The slow-to-anger part is as real as the irrevocable part.
506: If it helps ease the embarrassment, I totally recognize the situation/feelings you are describing. Intellectually, you know you should just get over it. But the emotions don't always do as they are told. (Also, getting over it makes it more final -- if you stop caring about the estrangement, then the friendship is truly over.)
...he was probably a rapist.
I think the test of a true friend is that they tell you your boyfriend is probably a rapist *before* they tell you he likes them more. Kinda softens the blow, don't you think?
532: Yeah, that's what made me less concerned. If your first order for me to break up with my boyfriend is about the fact that he thinks you're more attractive, and the second is that you think he's a rapist, I'm not biting.
I've quite deliberately un-friended a couple of ex-girlfriends, but I don't do the "let's just be friends" thing anyway
This is weird to me, but of course it's been discussed here before: do you, can you, carry on a friendship with an ex? They can be fraught, yes, but cutting someone who was that close to you out of your life completely .. I find that hard to do. When I've been on the receiving end of it, an ex who wants no further contact, despite the breakup having been amicable, well, I find that painful.
I'm talking chiefly about serious exes, though, not relatively passing, unserious relationships.
I'm better about being friends after passing, unserious relationships. I don't resent them afterward. I could be friends with a serious ex, I guess, if they hadn't pretty much universally all treated me like fucking scum when they were done with me.
The slow-to-anger part is as real as the irrevocable part.
This, too. I have a long, slow fuse, but when it goes off it goes off big.
525: Yeah, but it's not like he's using it any more, so.
do you, can you, carry on a friendship with an ex?
I found this a lot harder than I expected it to be.
That intensity of feeling is permitted ... more in some contexts than in others.
(539 a quote of 504, should have had italics.)
I have kind of a grudge against my brother-in-law because he threw sand in my (then) 3 yr-old son's face and made him cry, to 'teach him not to throw sand'. (And now 6 yrs later he has his own kids and I doubt he would take kindly to a similar intervention from me or anyone else).
I'm not sure how grudge-y it is though, really. I didn't blow up at him then though, and will interact pleasantly with him at family occasions. But I think ill of him, and if someone says "what's with that guy, he's a dick", I'll agree and share my reasons.
541: That's like Martial Arts Guy at a party who always picks the weakest person he can find to "teach how to defend themselves," only taken to the Nth degree. Crazy.
541: Too many 'though's, though.
Also, I have a crazy ex-girlfriend from 20 yrs ago, who hurt me bad, and then went mad. She tries to get in contact now and again (last through Facebook), and I don't reply, not because I am still angry, but because nothing good would come of it for either her or me.
544: Yes, though most of the madness came on 8-10 yrs later.
521 aptly describes my life, except that a person or two really has fucked me over, and I couldn't really hold on to the anger.
535: I could be friends with a serious ex, I guess, if they hadn't pretty much universally all treated me like fucking scum when they were done with me.
Ouch.
The greatest gift an ex several years ago -- who was, how to say, serious but short-lived -- gave me was to patiently wait in the months after he broke it off (he was right, I knew that, but I struggled). He continued to write me, carefully avoiding talk of his new romantic life so as not to hurt me, and just waited. There's such a thing as love without enough of the in-love. He managed to continue to share himself with me, until I got to the point where I could smile with him about his new romance(s).
It's worked out tremendously well, and I take him as an example. He's a good friend.
Yeah, staying in contact despite the breaking-off is the only way to do it, I think. IME, the worst break-ups are the ones in which someone says they want to stay close and then totally disappear and make you feel like an asshole for treating them like you actually know them.
I guess 549 sounds awfully naive, in that everyone knows "let's stay friends" is often BS, but in a few cases in which staying friends would have facilitated far greater comfort in unavoidable ongoing social engagements, I've been shocked how uncommon it is to follow through on this. I now spend about three weekends out of my year running into an ex in my field with whom staying friends would have not only been incredibly useful to both of us professionally, but with whom not being even able to speak to or about each other without bitterness and rage may result in the kind of career-ending awfulness suggested above. Seriously, dude, just stop being such a douche.
Seriously, dude, just stop being such a douche.
I think Hallmark prints that on greeting cards these days.
549 doesn't sound naive. Unless the breakup was contentious or involved ill-will, the parties presumably continue to hold each other in some regard. Kindness, man, kindness.
I don't know; people compartmentalize. (If you are not my girlfriend/boyfriend, I don't know what to do with you.) People sometimes seem to me to conserve their love, as though their hearts aren't big enough to hold multiple kinds of love for multiple people.
I've been on the road to maudlin and/or sentimental in this thread for quite some time, and am going to give it a rest now.
547: Oh yes. Not to the point of institutionalisation, but obvious within seconds of hearing her or reading anything she writes. She's only allowed limited contact with her kids (not with me! after my time, I hasten to add), which is incredibly sad, but she put them in too many fucked-up situations when she had custody.
I'm friends with some exes - the ones who aren't crazy. Others I've just lost contact with because these things happen, but we'd been on good terms before drifting apart. I don't think there's any lingering bitterness - even if the crazy ex knocked on the door (please God let this not happen) I'd invite her in for coffee and have an uncomfortable conversation.
472: almost entirely absent from male friendships in the same age group and that intensity is sort of orthogonal to intimacy
Oh, I don't know.
When I was 17 I befriended another guy who was 7 years my senior. He guided me into adulthood. I owe him a lot, probably including my life, given the number of times he talked me down when I was at the height of my depressive cycles. There was nothing sexual between us, but we behaved a lot like lovers, in hindsight. When we lived in different cities, we'd talk to each other on the phone nearly every day. Then, after we'd been friends for 5 years or so, he totally changed. Started treating me like I was expendable, just a minor part of his entourage. Our friendship limped along for another 3 years, with our "break-up" coming after he owed me about $900, which I've of course written off at this point. Also, before we parted company, he fucked our mutual close friend (although he had a girlfriend of several years, whom he's still with) and then didn't call her (our friend) for months. I still see him around, but it feels really weird and false to interact with him. Especially because I don't think he's capable of apologizing, or even acknowledging that he did anything wrong. Oh well.
528: Dickens clearly thinks she's wonderful, of course, like all his annoying hyper-passive legless angel punching bags (like Little Dorritt). The odd thing is, Esther is as she is because of her abusive upbringing in which she was taught to sacrifice herself to atone for her mother's sin. Dickens ostensibly thinks her upbringing is tragic; yet he's implicitly suggesting it's how you turn out a good woman.
Anyway, it's kind of tempting just to skip alternate chapters just so you don't have to hear her voice.
I dunno. Our Mutual Friend convinced me that Dickens has never loved his sentimental characters, and has gradually been making them more and more absurd and unpleasant until they finally become a total mockery of themselves against the backdrop of a London full of fascinating sickos.
The use of tenses in 556 is probably incorrect, but intriguing. Does Dickens still live, secreted away by some sinister cult and treated with unholy, life-extending perversions of the medical arts purely so that he may become ever less enamored of his sentimental characters, thus putting the lie to a modern-day London full of boring, healthy squares? Could be!
You think? For most of Mutual Friend, I thought Dickens was finally showing what happens when his sentimental characters gain depth through complex experience. But then it turns out it was just a big practical joke, and everyone really was sentimental, one-dimensional, well-meaning, and good-doing. Which is insanely creepy, of course, given the depths of the practical joke. The only way I can enjoy the book is to pretend the last quarter never happens.
I guess at that point it gets into the question of Dickens's attitude toward the characters and plot. It's hard to believe he could approve of what they do - a sane and level reading would demand he condemns them - but I think he really was that weird as to think that such behavior is admirable.
558: I love OMF, which is my favorite Dickens, but perhaps because I just can't believe he gives a shit about the squares. The baddies are too delicious. Silas Wegg!
And seriously, Esther is insanely creepy. Both Bleak House and Our Mutual Friend struck me as only making sense if Dickens is completely convinced that most of his readers are fucking morons and the others get that it's not particularly endearing to do things like bury dolls and then put dead babies on shelves.
I do get 541.
I interact with so few people (I have a relatively small social circle, and don't interact super-much with a lot of people even in that circle, and it has always been thus) that I don't end up having many of these fraught relationships. But I do get that kind of "I'll deal with you on an ongoing and civil basis but, really, you're a dick."
Actually, I do have that wrt professional relationships. In fact, now that I think of it, I have many many more grudges towards professional contacts ("relationship" is too strong) than personal. Probably because I feel like business is business, and people should act honestly and towards the common goals of getting shit done, whereas people are all emotionally fucked up, so, like, whatever.
I realize that this view of business is entirely naive, but there it is.
I've never once remained friends with an ex, and I am inclined to buy 552.2 as an explanation. Everyone I've ever been involved with went pretty much straight from barely-know-him to boyfriend to all-over-done-buh-bye-now.* Without a friendship prior to the romance, the idea of initiating one following the end of the romance didn't make sense. Also, as someone who has a very hard time shutting off feelings, hanging out as pals with someone I really wanted to make out with... Just easier not to be pals.
*Except for UNG, actually, with whom I was loosely friends with for a good six months beforehand. Shockingly, that prior base of friendship hasn't contributed to any sort of desire to stay friends.
Uh, I have no grudge against Dickens.
That was a fast and complete thread-shift.
Without a friendship prior to the romance, the idea of initiating one following the end of the romance didn't make sense.
This was a big part of the problem in my situation.
I think we don't really disagree - we're both saying "Man, for Dickens really to mean what he's saying, he'd have to think profoundly creepy and emotionally twisted stuff is just great!" It's just a question of if you bite the bullet on the modus ponens or not... I don't think he could get his grotesques so grotesque if he weren't pretty emotionally warped himself. I don't think he had that much distance from them. (And I include his sentimental sweeties in the group of his grotesques.)
And OMF is my favorite Dickens too - it's a measure of how good it is that even with that horribly unnerving last quarter that perverts all that's gone before, it's still on balance so good. For the first 3/4, it shows what it would be like if Dickens could write characters that actually grew and changed. Until it turns out they weren't growing and changing.
Inconveniently, the one ex I'm still good friends with is one of the few people my wife holds a strong grudge against. (It used to be much more awkward than it is now.)
I've never once remained friends with an ex, and I am inclined to buy 552.2 as an explanation. Everyone I've ever been involved with went pretty much straight from barely-know-him to boyfriend to all-over-done-buh-bye-now.* Without a friendship prior to the romance, the idea of initiating one following the end of the romance didn't make sense. Also, as someone who has a very hard time shutting off feelings, hanging out as pals with someone I really wanted to make out with... Just easier not to be pals.
This describes me exactly. Except for the "him" and "boy" parts.
And moreover, the only people I've ever gone from being friends with to trying to date turned out to not want to date me. Which caused me to no longer want the friendship to happen, as it introduced a power imbalance. The irrationality of this has probably been discussed before.
I mostly don't talk to my exes. How did this get on the subject of exes? Whole different story from non-ex grudgery.
565 refers to Dickens in the present tense again. You people aren't doing much to set my mind at ease.
YOU WANT GROTESQUE? I'LL SHOW YOU GROTESQUE!
568.1: I'll tie it all together by clarifying that, while I've never remained friends with an ex, I don't hold grudges in those cases (with the obvious exception).
Magpie and I were talking about this recently. She and someone I'm Facebook friends with are the only two people I've ever kissed I still speak to. (And even the Facebook frend only got back in touch after a long period of no contact.)
Blume tells me "something something author function present tense something something", but I maintain that 557 is the most parsimonious explanation.
573: Your listening skills wrt Blume portend either a very long marriage or a very short one.
557 is the plot of Young Sherlock Holmes as I remember it.
She and someone I'm Facebook friends with are the only two people I've ever kissed I still speak to
This made me look through my FB friends to count how many of them I've kissed. Fifteen. A couple of those I'm not actively in touch with, but surprisingly many of them are people I still keep up with at least a little.
Ack, no, sixteen! I keep looking through the list again and remembering things.
Me? I was at three before leechblock shut me out of facebook. I bet I hit five.
I love Young Sherlock Holmes.
578: I've never hit any of my Facebook friends.
Five. For three, a total of four times.
I like the use of "things" in 577.
580:I guess none of them were your son's assistant football coach.
Blume tells me "something something author function present tense something something"
Had you seriously never encountered the practice of referring to what authors do in their writings in the present tense?
It really is, in fact, the only way that makes sense. The present tense is the tense of generic and time-inspecific claims, such as are both "in the second chapter of Bleak House Dickens introduces Lady Dedlock" and "pear trees bloom in spring".
The past tense could only refer to one specific introduction by Dickens. Which? When he wrote the chapter? It would have all the problems of Searle's illocutionary theory of fiction, and more!
Not to mention, for some applications it would obviously be bizarre. "In 570a1-5 Plato argued that …" Well, he did no such thing. Stephanus numbers long postdate Plato.
This made me look through my FB friends to count how many of them I've kissed.
My total is embarrassingly high, and I didn't count "dudes I've kissed while drunk," as We Don't Talk About That. "Had sex with" is more manageable.
Oh, new topic, huh?
I'm pretty sure it's five.
I think you'll find it's only one new topic.
Your good opinion of me may be misplaced.
584: I found it strange when talking about the whole arc of an author's career, is all. It certainly seems the most logical within the context of a single work, or a connected series of works.
How much of a kiss does it have to be to count?
Nine, which feels low, as I am both a great kisser of girls and a great befriender on Facebook. Woops! Looked at the summer camp list, up to 12.
Ten. Including both of my first two boyfriends, both at summer camp when I was middle school aged. Different summers though.
590: like one lip, two lips, tongue, on the penis? Would that be the scale?
590: And does the kiss have to be on the lips? If not, my total is way higher.
I didn't count "dudes I've kissed while drunk,"
I did include "chicks I kissed while drunk," so.
"Had sex with" is more manageable.
Not going there...
I should've signed that "OPINIONATED HOMOPHOBE."
It's the perfect progressive, I think, that's slightly unusual. "Gradually makes them more and more absurd and unpleasant" would feel more ordinary to me than "has gradually been," etc.
I've only had sex with three Facebook friends, though there are two others whose pages I glance at from time to time, including my ex-wife.
600! Yeah, 599! Not 600! Too slow, Sifu! On the penis!
13! Remembered the post junior year summer program.
I mean, off the top of my head, I've kissed my mom, aunt, and son. And I have friends who I usually greet with a kiss. But I haven't tasted any of them.
Adding people on facebook who you're not friends with to your total seems contrary to the spirit of the exercise.
Ach, 14, but I shouldn't have. I'll stop now.
Apo kisses with the top of his head.
603: oh, right. New rule: romantic kisses, or the drunken equivalent, only!
I've only had sex with three Facebook friends, though there are two others whose pages I glance at from time to time
So glancing at Facebook pages from time to time is close to having sex?
So, for instance, if you made out with your mom while drunk that totally counts.
Fifteen, thirteen, leven, fourteen. This thread is making me feel like a man-whore. Fuck all a y'all.
604: That's why they were not in the count, but in a separate, more forlorn and stalkery category.
One. Facebook keeps suggesting I friend my ex-girlfriend from high school, which would make it two.
603: I was originally talking about kissing in a romantic context. But if we're talking about chaste, familial/friendly kissing, my total only goes up by one.
It's the perfect progressive, I think, that's slightly unusual. "Gradually makes them more and more absurd and unpleasant" would feel more ordinary to me than "has gradually been," etc.
I found that very strange myself, actually. "has gradually been making them" makes it out that he's still doing it. The present tense we use does not have imperfective aspect! That is why it is suitable for the time-inspecific.
Fifteen, thirteen, leven, fourteen.
What do these numbers refer to? You know, so I can judge if you're actually a manwhore or not.
Why are you getting defensive, Sifu? AWB's was the eccentric usage.
615: The absurdly low but apparently normal and whitebread figures thus far quoted in this thread.
Maybe we should be counting as a percentage of Facebook friends.
Kisses: 5
Romantic kisses: 5
Romantic kisses on more than one occasion: 3
More than two occasions: 2
Sex: 1
Been to baseball games with: 12
619 is what I actually thought.
Teach me your ways, DS.
Maybe we should be counting as a percentage of Facebook friends.
I was thinking that too.
621: I've kissed a paltry 21% of my Facebook friends.
See, that still sounds licentious and depraved. Fuck.
1.8%. But if everyone else I've kissed in an even slightly romantic setting were included, the figure would go up to … 2.2%!
The absurdly low but apparently normal and whitebread figures thus far quoted in this thread.
Maybe everyone has just been having all of their make-out sessions with relative strangers, whom they don't FB-friend afterwords.
Platonic kisses only: 20
For real kisses: 18
Sex: 11
I don't understand 624. What's the distinction?
The distinction is that between x/y and (x+n)/(y+n), Sifu.
What's the distinction?
Including the ones chained in his crawlspace.
What is conveyed is that n is also a small number.
I think it means that nosflow once kissed his grandmother on the beach, at sunset?
Including the ones chained in his crawlspace.
It seems I have 223 Facebook friends, so that makes my percentage .45%. If I added the other ex (which Facebook encouraged again when I logged in just now) it would go up to .89%.
I guess this is actually more apropos.
628: Although, the bulk of my points on that test were from drugs. (I've settled down!)
Wait, I should have one more in my two categories that count.
I totally didn't just friend request somebody to boost my numbers.
634: Resolved, The Collector by Fowles is the creepiest piece of shit ever written.
Wow, college was a long, blurry time ago.
I'm going through to see who I can add.
Hey, D______ S_______ is married now. And her hair is even whiter, and she's even more muscular.
A____ M_______ looks happy. And is in NYC, what are the odds? Answer: very good.at d
J_____ R____: a graduation picture? What does two purple tassels mean? Wait, I think she hates me.
The girl who didn't go to college....isn't on Facebook.
If we included friendly how-do-you-do sorts of kissers, my total goes up by several hundred. I am a great friendly kisser of men and women alike.
D______ S_______ is married now.
You're friends with Doc Slack?!
Are you guys seriously friending people just to increase your percentages? You're never going to catch up to Slack.
Numerically more efficient to run around and kiss the unkissed.
I actually only added somebody I should have added previously anyhow.
648: Don't make it sound so shocking, for Chrissakes.
But I'm not married.
649: Yeah yeah rub it in.
Mine is 2.7%, and only if I count one of my friends in college who was gay but liked to make out anyway.
Much easier to unfriend a bunch of those people you haven't kissed.
Numerically more efficient to run around and kiss the unkissed.
Indeed, kissing the unkissed but friended can theoretically increase your ratio to 100%, while friending the kissed but unfriended never can.
(Um I suppose I should have specified make out with me, despite the fact that I lacked the appropriate genitalia).
The one person I could add to increase my percentage by a meager 0.4% probably wouldn't accept my request.
653: gay friend who liked to make out totally counts.
655: But Blume has the genius answer.
655: The strategy in 654 would work for that as well.
You can always re-friend them in the morning.
(I'm choosing to ignore that blatant pwnage.)
You can re-friend them in the morning but pwnage is for ever.
I have my niche.
See, this is why I don't comment about romantic relationships on unfogged. I would just end up intruding on teo's niche.
Bad news, Death. Thou shalt die.
668: And who's gonna enforce it? Cthulhu, that overgrown squid?
Yet others say, "Death, be not proud." Well guess what? I'm Death, bitch! And I'm proud! Whatcha gonna do?
(When Death-a-Mania runs wild on you?!)
I bet nobody can anyone beat my total of 12. see 620
I have never been to a baseball game. Ever.
7.8%, I think. Can't remember for a couple. Hunh. There could be two ratios, since the friend graph is directed, one for those who friended to the page owner, and the second for those to whom the page owner friended. Indeed, the ratio of friendees:frienders should be reported as well, both in raw form as well as normalized by the number of friends at each vertex. Time for a drink.
meager 0.4% yikes, this means over 200 friends. Is that normal? do you ever decline?
Also, I've got bad news for nosflow
Is that normal?
Pretty much, yeah. I've got 223, and I'm hardly the most friendly person out there.
I pared all the non-actual-friends-or-acquaintances off my list and it's over 350. Paring the mere-acquaintances off would probably result in about a hundred or so.
I did the math, and I think DS has kissed more people than I've hugged, even casually.
The last four people I've friended haven't responded, and none were for kissing-related reasons. Are people just overwhelmed by Mafia and How Drunk Am I? requests, and only click on the top right region of the screen once a month nowadays?
I hardly ever get such requests, not being fun.
682: I'm changing my screen name to Deuce Bigalow. You heard it here first.
I friended someone the other day (an acquaintance from high school). It was the first time I'd done that in, I don't know, months I guess. I get occasional friend requests, like maybe once a week or so, some of which are people I knew slightly in high school but most of which lately seem to be spam accounts that have nothing on the profile but a picture of a cute girl and a link to some porn-ish website.
684: Oh, it just proves that I'm a prude and you're (probably) a bit older than I am. And actually, I'm a promiscuous hugger, so I bet 682's not literally true.
In the early days of the FB craze, I constantly got friend requests from HS people with whom the only relationship I'd had was mutual, poisonous hostility.
Wow, this is thought provoking. Apparently the typical user has 100 facebook friends. I would be interested to know the median blocked user list's length, and median privacy radius compared to default.
Maybe it's an age effect, different notions of privacy-- people I am friends with who are a generation older have fewer friends, and conversely for younger ones.
Celebrities and people with wide-ranging responsibility that I know opt out or use aliases. Kids are shallow and old people are boring seems to cover everything.
Don't be silly. I'm not going to die.
Maybe it's an age effect, different notions of privacy-- people I am friends with who are a generation older have fewer friends, and conversely for younger ones.
Yeah, I think this is most or all of it. People my age are Facebook friends with almost everyone we know, and as Facebook has expanded and changed the criteria for friend status for most people seem to have been considerably reduced.
I friended someone the other day (an acquaintance from high school).
Surely you should friend your acquaintance who's in high school?
Wow. One old friend of mine has 867 Facebook friends. No wonder she doesn't have time to reply to emails anymore.
The editor of the boston review has nearly 3,500 friends.
Hmm. This dwelling on un-replied-to emails is dangerously close to grudgelike. Mustn't contradict my self-description.
people I am friends with who are a generation older have fewer friends
And those who are high school teachers are probably the outliers in this category...
696: You're dead to her, that's all. Nothing to dwell on.
This dwelling on un-replied-to emails is dangerously close to grudgelike.
Wait, dwelling is the same as holding a grudge? Then I must immediately counteract everything said above. I'm a champion dweller.
Still figuring out how best to spin my Facebook/kissing stats, which are unimpressive in raw form. I've had sex with the majority of the Facebook friends I've kissed, and with more Fb friends than I've actively friended (as opposed to accepting friend requests). I won't be beaten at this game, damn it; don't friend me unless you're willing to have sex (or at least make out) first.
700: Apparently, high percentages on the kissing are not the Done Thing in the Swipple Tribe. I wouldn't worry about it.
I'm off to sell my kissable lips on a lonely, windy street corner. Don't wait up.
Apparently, high percentages on the kissing are not the Done Thing in the Swipple Tribe.
Racist.
Wait, dwelling is the same as holding a grudge? Then I must immediately counteract everything said above. I'm a champion dweller.
You're right. I dwell a fair amount also. It's not the same.
Accepted a Facebook friend request today from a should-have-kissed-but-didn't. That's not helping my already low percentage any.
I got a Facebook friend request from someone that initially I couldn't remember, when I realized that not only did I remember her, but that we'd once slept together.
Fine. I'm going to start making out with my not-formerly-kissed Facebook friends. Well, not all of them. But enough to make a difference.
690: As long as you bring your Bible, you're secure.
Is there a word for carrying around guilt for a lot longer than one should?
(Besides the obvious answers - Jewish, Catholic).
708: I always expected to get that message, but I have to admit I never expected to get it via Unfogged comment box.
Accepted a Facebook friend request today from a should-have-kissed-but-didn't.
There are so many.
I thought I was going to beat Ned because my whole office used to go to baseball games together, but it turns out I am not FB friends with quite as many officemates as I thought. 10 or 11.
Is there a word for carrying around guilt for a lot longer than one should?
I had this random moment earlier today of thinking how stupidly insensitive something was that I said to someone 8 years ago, and feeling really shitty about it. Probably they've forgotten the whole thing.
It would be awesome if "Death" became a regular commenter under that name.
712: Yes, that, exactly. I had the same moment. Except the offending comment was about 15 years ago and I was 12 at the time.
714: There should be a word for it. That deserves some sort of prize.
Is there a word for carrying around guilt for a lot longer than one should?
How about carrying guilt precisely as long as one should, which is forever?
Friend who died of AIDS who I thought was having me on. Friend who died of a heart attack and a big public funeral not two blocks away from my workplace that I didn't notice, and was informed of six months later.
My Facebook account is under a made-up Albanian name; I was curious what the site was all about, and I couldn't look around until I'd set up a profile. Once in a while I get friend requests from random Albanians, mostly men, none of whom I expect ever to kiss.
Oh, shite, my mother-in-law just friend-requested me.
Apparently we all missed a big opportunity.
Quick, redirect her to your made-up Albanian profile!
re: 526
re: Speech DeBelle -- she's great, isn't she? I only discovered her stuff recently. I should follow the UK hip-hop scene more, because there are so many good people out there.
One of my Facebook friends that I've kissed has recently had an article in a national newspaper about how he visited prostitutes. Nothing to do with me, honest.
I've kissed 1.5% of my 265 FB friends. (Aside: A few weeks ago I had 266 friends, but I cannot figure out who defriended me. I keep thinking of people who might be mad at me, and checking to make sure that they are still on my list, and yep, there they are. So it seems I somehow--innocuous old me!--have become dead to someone, yet I cannot figure out to whom I am dead! This is stressful.) The nearest unkissed FB friend is one of my roommates, who is presently over on the other side of the living room. Though this "% of FB friends kissed" statistic is undoubtedly an important one in one's life, I am not prepared to suffer the social fallout of going over there and making my move.
671.2 is quite funny. Good work, Death.
Though this "% of FB friends kissed" statistic is undoubtedly an important one in one's life, I am not prepared to suffer the social fallout of going over there and making my move.
Fair enough, but the extent of social fallout likely depends on the roommate's gender and both of your sexual orientations, information that is curiously absent from your account.
All indications are that we are both boys who prefer girls, and we attend the same institution, so I imagine the fallout would be quite great indeed. And besides, it's getting late, and I'm just not feeling this as a night for sexual exploration and the transgressing of boundaries.
I've kissed like 11.2% of my 416 FB friends, which, given that I have a ton of distant friends from HS on there, many of my professors, and plenty of my own students, none of whom I've kissed, makes the total a little shockingly high. I kiss people! There wasn't a lot to do in Nerd U town. However, I've only had sex with like six of my FB friends.
2.7%. Well, out of 37 FB friends. Which is one guy. Still friends, notwithstanding 562, because he was never my boyfriend. Best godammed kiss of my entire life, though.
723: Every time a woman drives me to seek the company prostitutes I am careful to assure her it's not her fault. It's the gentlemanly thing to do.
['cry, cry, pay for sex, cry']
Every time a woman drives me to seek the company prostitutes
You don't have your own car?
Pretty cool that your company keeps prostitutes on retainer, though.
It's the mocking of my illiterate burblings that leads to these urges in the first place. I'll tell her Apo sent me.
Over 200 Facebook friends sounds right. Kissed three of them. I have the feeling it should be more, partly no doubt due to simple self-consciousness and also partly because there's one person I know I've kissed but I don't think she has a Facebook page, so I didn't count her. And this reminds me of someone else for whom I need to check and see if she has a Facebook page. Can't do any of this right now, of course.
Ah, the cruelty of fashion! Here's this poor girl who once kissed Cyrus and has been pining after him ever since, but he totally discounts her because she hasn't got a facebook page.
Hmph. If we discount fililal, platonic, and drunkenly-on-New-Year's-Eve, then I've only kissed 1.07% of my Facebook friends. And it's not for lack of wishing that the total isn't higher.
||
British people of Unfogged: I had a dream last night, the details of which I will not bore you with, that ended with a shot of an adding machine ringing up the change in average ticket prices for theater seats in the UK between 2000 and 2007. The numbers my dream gave me seemed highly suspect. Leaving aside the big, opulent West End productions, what do you expect to pay when you go to the theater? Around here, the days of the $15 ticket are drawing to a close. Most small theaters are charging $18-$24, and the big behmoth theaters can get away with selling the cheap seats for up to $50 or $60, with the good seats on prime nights at over $100.
Thank you for your consideration.
||>
416: Picked up 1632 and 33 on the way home from work yesterday, and realized why I hadn't read them before -- after the first one, David Weber's a co-author and his name's all over them in big print. I read a couple of the Honor Harrington things, and decided that if I was going to read nonsense about how liberals and feminists are systematically personally unpleasant people with bad character, I might as well stick with the Corner, which at least relates on some level to current politics.
Hadn't really thought consciously about it, but Weber's name on a book generally puts it into the 'not worth bothering with' category for me.
736. I'd friend you, but I have no facebook page. (Nobody I know IRL is as sad as me about spending time on line, so I don't see the point.)
Me neither -- I figure if I had an FB page, I'd have friends.
737. Haven't a clue what tickets cost in London these days - rarely go there. Here's a successful West End production now touring with tickets in our city going at £7.50 - £20.00. That looks about right. The £7.50 seats will not have a great view; the £20.00 ones will. I leave the exchange rate as an exercise for others
re: 737
I don't go to the theatre that often. This year we've only been twice, I think, and neither was to see a play. So, we saw an opera which was around 50 pounds a ticket (80 dollars per ticket approx), and a stand-up comedian, which was around 25 pounds a ticket (40 dollars each, approx).
The last couple of times I've seen a play it's been at the Globe, which doesn't operate a normal pricing policy [if you go in as a groundling it's only £5 per ticket].
Tickets for plays at our local theatre are between 18 and 25 a ticket (i.e. 30 - 40 US dollars).
re: 741
That's interesting. The same production is touring through Oxford and tickets are 17 - 24 pounds. Some performances tickets are 19 - 26.50.
I've also been to a baseball game with 12 FB friends. The Cardinals game that was part of senior week in college pushed it that high.
and a stand-up comedian, which was around 25 pounds a ticket
Jeezus! Better have been fucking funny.
Romantically kissed 21 of 245, though there are a few "maybes" I didn't count because of haziness. If I count those it gets past 30.
re: 745
Ross Noble, and yeah, he was funny. That was tickets plus Ticketmaster's usurious evil booking fee.
That's about standard as far as I can tell. Russell Howard is here next week - roughly 20 quid I think; Bill Bailey in a month or two, - 25 plus booking fee. The SE of England is expensive.
738: Heh. Now that you mention it, the rehabilitation of a strawconservative from the first book into a valuable comrade, good family man and war-veteran-full-of-quiet-dignity in 1633 did seem forced to me. Maybe it was Weber's work.
But yeah, the series quickly becomes a team effort. If you don't like Weber (I've never read anything of his other than in the 1632 series), maybe you'd appreciate Virginia DeMarce more.
739, 740 - Me neither. Stay on the outside with me!
I figure if I had an FB page, I'd have friends.
I'll be your friend, LB. We could even make out.
We could even make out.
Hey, OFE asked first.
I have only read 1 or 2 of the 1632 series, long ago, but as I remember they do tend toward the libertarian, mildly, and trend anti-Catholic more strongly. They, and I suppose many others, would view these as related.
And certainly classically liberal. The series is political propaganda.
Yeah, I don't so much mind the political propaganda. Weber lost me on the childish namecalling.
Friend who died of AIDS who I thought was having me on.
I think this might be the strangest thing ever. Do other peoples friends joke about having serious illnesses? A boy once tried to convince my sister that he had a fatal brain tumor so that she would go out with him, but he wasn't actually a friend.
Do other peoples friends joke about having serious illnesses?
Well, there was Ogged and the fake stomach cancer thing.
I guess the theme that disturbs me is that the Thirty Years War was somehow determined by the existing ideologies but our 20th century catastrophes are unfortunate accidents.
WWI & WWII, Fascism & communism are outgrowths of liberalism. The people rule, and often the people are crazy.
Having said all this, the 1632 series is fun, and intelligent propaganda.
738: Hadn't really thought consciously about it, but Weber's name on a book generally puts it into the 'not worth bothering with' category for me.
It's been so long, but I have vague memories of Weber sucking. However, Honor Harrington reminded me: howabout Sassinak and sequels?
max
['Probably read those.']
For a novel covering the period immediately after Luther, the Peasant's War, anabaptism, etc then Luther Blisset's* "Q" is worth a read.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(novel)
I thought it was great, anyway.
* one of the names of the Italian anarchist collective who also write as Wu Ming,
Luther Blisset's* "Q" is worth a read
It is also available on manybooks.net for free.
[geezer]When I was a boy we got it on with people because we lusted after their bodies, not their electronic paraphernalia.[/geezer]
I'm not following the distinction there.
753: I remember they do tend toward the libertarian, mildly,
Huh. I've only read the first one so far, but the heroes are the United Mine Workers of America, collectively, kinda. I'd expect libertarians to be throwing it aside in disgust.
I've had sex with the majority of the Facebook friends I've kissed
I've had sex with everyone I've ever kissed*. Interpret this as you wish. I choose to believe it's because I'm just that good a kisser.
* Romantically. I haven't had sex with Aunt Betsie, or with Grandma.
I've kissed four out of 69 Facebook friends, which is about 5.7%.
763:Yeah, I'l retract. I don't remember well enough, but classical liberal is probably far better.
I just don't remember the uptimers (?) interacting with the pre-modern in any kind of dialectical way.
Sumofagum. Rob Farley writes a thinkpiece this morning on the nation-state as killing machine.
I've probably hugged at least half of my Facebook friends at one time or another, but that's as far as it's gone. Maybe we're a chaste lot.
I've only cut off one ex-friend completely, someone I haven't spoken to in nearly twenty years. It's unlikely that we'll ever speak again, but if I found myself in the same room with him, accidentally, I could be polite--at least for the time it took me to leave.
738
416: Picked up 1632 and 33 on the way home from work yesterday...
Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 06-16-09 7:54 AM
763
Huh. I've only read the first one so far...
Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 06-16-09 9:18 AM
Heh, it seems you read as fast as I do.
757
I guess the theme that disturbs me is that the Thirty Years War was somehow determined by the existing ideologies but our 20th century catastrophes are unfortunate accidents.
There's a scene late in 1632 where a character says the reverse of this, that the 20th-century catastrophes were a consequence of the Thirty Years War.
Early in 1633 Cardinal Richelieu makes a similar accusation to what bob is saying here, and I think the authors pass up an opportunity for deep thought or moral ambiguity or whatever when they shoot it down right away.
I started counting, but I couldn't remember whether we were only counting "romantic" kisses, or all kisses.
Facebook also just suggested that I might want to become friends with my accountant. HOW DOES IT KNOW?
763: Yeah, Flint made A Big Deal on Usenet about how he'd been in a union, was working-class, blah blah blah. Still an asshole, though.
Hrm. I don't know anything personally about any of the people I'm talking about, but I found Schmitz's books kind of dull and annoying, if I remember them from high school correctly . Not that being an asshole to anyone is a good thing, but I can't hold that too strongly against Flint. What'd he do, specifically?
To be clear, Flint was being a complete asshole because he had bowdlerized some famous (dead) authors. People called him on it and he said that he was doing the works a favor by modernizing them and anyway he hadn't changed things.
I think Bob is misremembering the books. The Catholic church comes off fairly well and the mildly left POV (it fades in later books) was a refreshing change from other Baen books.
Bowdlerized like, censoring sexual material?
As I recall (and Google Groups is no help here), he edited out things such as references to smoking to make it less jarring to the modern reader. Mild stuff. But he also claimed that he had changed nothing. That is what really pissed off people. And he had the "I'm a pro editor, little people" attitude that was so endearing to fandom. This was 15 years ago or so and on this I hold no grudge. For the most part, I do like his own books.
771
... but I found Schmitz's books kind of dull and annoying ...
I liked the "Agent of Vega" stories. Of course I read them a long time ago.
774: he edited out things such as references to smoking to make it less jarring to the modern reader
???
Pick yourself up off the floor, DS, it's true: people used to smoke.
I don't think I remember Agent of Vega. I remember the Witches of Karres, I think, and didn't like it much -- it was one of those books that was annoying because it fit the description of the sort of thing I liked almost exactly, but still didn't click for me.
772:I take it all back!
I noticed this synopsis of one sidestory last night.
The stories by Gorg Huff and Paula Goodlett explore the alien land practices and ownership of down-time Germany as Birdie seeks to gain additional lands. Land sales are rare, worse, the lawyers are in control and there are three general levels of vested interest: The tenants, have certain rights and obligations over and above monetary rent while leases are generally for three generations or the lesser of 99 years. In between the owner in fact, and the tenants is usually a monetary transaction which gives the rents to any number of claimants--depending upon the finances of the landholding family. The claimants all have a say in the farm operation to some extent, as do the occupants of the farm villages, which also have the right to disapprove or accept new co-farmers, for the land is farmed co-operatively with another set of obligations and entitlements. Birdie can't just go an buy a piece of land, he has to buy it from three different and diverse groups of people... and get them all to agree to terms. As the story notes, seventeenth century Germany was a lawyers paradise.
Without having read the book, that looks like a dialectic with the pre-modern, important and useful.
I have been going off that paragraph for hours, remembering the politics and economics of forest management in 18th century France and Shogunate Japan while mowing my lawn. Timber, coke, and bog iron are just fascinating.
Last time I paid for my own ticket at the theatre was the West End about a year ago - I think it was about £30. (Which I thought was good value for Ken Stott and Ralph Fiennes.) We saw Derren Brown here locally a couple of weeks ago and I think that was £27. (And we could work out most of the tricks - think I have seen him too many times.)
OTOH, "lawyer's paradise" is a sour way to describe externalities codified as rights.
781 isn't phrased well. I think I need a lawyer.
777: As a modern reader, this perplexes me. Did people in the dark age before our pristine utopian times really light things on fire and inhale the smoke? How barbaric! I find it difficult to imagine. What's next, Fluid Transfer?
Thanks Britons! That was interesting. I'm surprised the West End/touring show prices were so cheap -- were those through some kind of special deal, or full retail? There seems to be a greater variation, but perhaps that's based on the quality of the shows/small sample size.
When we get Broadway touring shows through here they usually soak you pretty good. But we are an outpost, and snooty. And the venues are all 100% union too.
764: Brock! Me too! Every guy I've ever kissed (romantically, at least), I also had sex with (eventually, though--not, like, immediately). Glad to know this isn't as rare as I thought.
The really depressing part is my best lesbian friend has kissed more men than I have. By a wide margin.
I've only ever kissed 6 men. Still friends (of a sort) with all of them, even the one who broke my heart. (Now also "friends" with the woman he broke my heart by screwing, because of her tireless efforts and my lack of ability to hold a grudge. But it's only pseudo-Facebook-friendship, not the real kind.)
Stats: 4 FB friends kissed out of 141 friends total = 2.8%
Not on FB, but the only person I've kissed that I would realistically friend is, in fact, on it, so, if I were very careful, I could manage 100%.
I have not kissed any LinkedIn contacts.
But my lifetime romantic history is short on the numbers, no matter how you slice them.
Good grief, I just realized that, since 1994 (age 21), I've only added 2 kissing partners, and one of those was in '96.
786:Do dogs count?
If you let dogs French you, do they count double?
764, 785: I'm not quite in this club, but I'm not that far off -- most people I've kissed romantically I've had sex with.
Do dogs count?
I think Rin Tin Tin counted by scratching his paw on the ground. Or maybe that was Lassie?
Oh wait, I think actually it's Mr. Ed I'm thinking of.
I'm not sure if chickens count, but that one at the State Fair always kicked my ass at tic tac toe.
I'm not sure if chickens count
Only if they have a Facebook account.
that one at the State Fair always kicked my ass at tic tac toe.
There was an arcade in Chinatown with a tic-tac-toe-playing chicken that drove me nuts when I was a kid. How could a chicken possibly be that good?
791: Wait a minute, did you meet a partner in a big white-shoe law firm there? Is that how you got into a legal career? GO TO CHURCH, RIGHT NOW!
792: I am fascinated, but mystified.
Do other peoples friends joke about having serious illnesses?
I do have a(n estranged... ) friend who is a hypochondriac. A few years ago she had a brain tumor. Presently she has a mysterious lump.
Facebook also just suggested that I might want to become friends with my accountant. HOW DOES IT KNOW?
You know how it asks you if it can upload your email address book to suggest friends? I bet your accountant let it upload his address book.
784 - full price - you get a better price usually if you can buy direct from the theatre. We were way up high for my £30-35 Stott/Fiennes thing. I saw War Horse at the National in September, for which I didn't pay, but its West End transfer has £75 for the top price tickets, whereas at the National itself, prices are much more reasonable. (For probably more comfort and a better view, and the best stage in London.)
Locally, we get a lot of tribute bands, big comedians (and other people off the telly), and kids' shows. £25 is the pricier end of the spectrum. This year's panto will be £16 apparently - Cinderella if anyone fancies it.
In Oxford it's rare to get tickets for under 20 quid for much, but yeah, 20 - 25 seems the norm. We paid more for the opera -- WNO, touring -- but it was last minute and we had excellent seats.
Ticketmaster are evil bastards, though. It works out another 20% on top, easy.
Yeah, as far as I can remember I have never bought a ticket from Ticketmaster. It's probably even worse now that we've legalized scalping here. There's a little scalper's outlet near the stadium, I can't imagine what they must charge for some hot tickets.
In my dream, and I thought this might have actually been the case, I was imagining that better arts funding might mean lower ticket prices. I wonder what percentage of people in the theater world in the UK make a true living wage? And are small-to-medium theaters unionized? Clearly I will have to ask around here to find people who've worked or taught over there.
re: 798
I would imagine unionisation is widespread. The performers are certainly all unionised.
I have a friend who works in the theatre -- I think he's now the touring manager for an opera company, but he's done all sorts: stage carpentry and set building, stage management, etc. I always had the impression he wasn't exactly swimming in cash, but we never talked figures, so I have no idea. He's more senior now, so who knows ...
798: AFAIK, it's pretty much a straight skip from community/volunteer theater to fully unionized, at least in Pgh. Which doesn't address your dream, but is unusual for any American industry.
You know, I think that I have kissed romantically almost everyone I've ever had sex with.
801: But there was that one time you really needed the money?
Oh, I needed the money every time.
755
Do other peoples friends joke about having serious illnesses?
I would if I could but I never manage to catch an opening.
I get bumps on my skin, mostly if not entirely on my scalp. Subaceous cysts, I think they're called. I have had at least four removed since I was a teen, and I have an appointment for another on Friday. AFAIK they're completely harmless; getting them removed is just a cosmetic issue, unless they get in the way of a bike helmet strap or something, as one did. And it it can hurt when I'm getting a haircut and the barber doesn't know about them. Stuff like that.
Anyways, when worrying medical problems up in conversation, sometimes I mention my cysts and try to be glum but blasé about it. "Oh, I've got a lump I need to have removed." I keep waiting for someone to get horrified at the possibility that it's cancer, but so far no one has fallen for it.
Subaceous cysts, I think they're called.
Sebaceous, I suspect.
804: but so far no one has fallen for it.
Other interpretations of the reactions might come to mind. (But only to the minds of the heartless and cruel.)
806: heh, maybe you're right. You never know.