My three-and-a-half-year-old is deep in the pit of an existential crisis. I know that sounds adorable and precocious and like a good opportunity for personal growth for a Mama that purports to be mindful, and it is all those things. It is.
But, no jokes, no funny business, it's also hell. A three-and-a-half-year-old existential crisis involves some pretty horrendous temper tantrums. You can't really blame her, really: it's got to be awful to be in the grips of angsty ennui when you don't even know the words "angst" and "ennui." As nebulous and imprecise as they are, they at least provide some sort of structure for your feelings.
It's been a really tough week for us, these past seven days or so. She's been moody, operating on a hair-trigger that sends her from smiling and delightful to anger ball monster in a matter of seconds. There have been lots of thrown toys, lots of screams, lots of "NO!" regardless of what is being offered.
After her angry outbursts, she always starts to cry and then tries to burrow into me. If I ask her to stop crying, she'll look up at me with tear-stained cheeks and whimper, "But I'm really sad, Mama. I'm really sad."
It's heartbreaking.
But for seven days, I have been unable to get her to tell me what it is, exactly, that she's sad about. She's either ignored the question completely when its been asked, or mumbled some throwaway answer along the lines of "I don't know."
Yeah, yeah, I know: she's my kid. She's MY daughter. This behavior makes perfect sense when you think about it that way, right?
Last night, after the fourth straight dinner-table meltdown, I took her upstairs to calm down. Time-outs weren't working, obviously, so I sat with her, instead - the two of us cuddled up in the rocker in her room.
And she said to me again, "I'm sad, Mama. I'm just really sad."
"What are you sad about?" I asked, again, with no hope or expectation of a response.
She lifted her chin, and the lamplight glinted on her wet, mottled cheeks. "I don't know who I am, Mama!" she wailed confessionally. "What's my fourth name?"
I was taken aback. What did she mean, fourth name? What was this about not knowing who she is?
"You're Genevieve Anne Findley. You're my snugglebug, and you are my best girl, and you are clever and strong and big and beautiful," I said to her. "Mama gave you three names. Genevieve, for St. Genevieve; Anne for Anne Shirley; and Findley, just like Mama."
She wasn't sobbing anymore, but there were still tears making tracks down her face, and her grip on my shirt was compulsively tight.
"But what about my fourth name, Mama? I should have four names," she choked out.
"Well, you think about what you want your fourth name to be. You think about all the names you know, and all the names you've heard, and when you find the perfect fourth name, you let me know, and we'll add it, ok?" This is me trying to be supportive in my absolute bafflement.
She snuggled deeper into my chest and stared at the wall. I stroked her hair. We sat and rocked, gently, back and forth, back and forth.
After what felt like an eternity, she straightened up and looked me dead in the eye.
"Bookwriter," she said. "My fourth name is Bookwriter."
"Absolutely," I replied. "Genevieve Anne Bookwriter Findley."
She squeezed out a tiny smile, and back we went to the dinner table, where she still didn't eat anything, but at least she didn't howl the whole time.
My three-and-a-half-year-old, who can't write her own name yet, wants to be a bookwriter. And is deep in the pit of an existential crisis. Perhaps some stereotypes exist for good reason. And perhaps all writers really are crazy, right from the very beginning. It would sure explain a lot about me.
Showing posts with label growing up. Show all posts
Showing posts with label growing up. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Thursday, January 19, 2012
"Girl Land:" This Is What Sexual Trauma Looks Like
Author's note: As you'll see in the comments, I was mistaken about the publicly acknowledged magnitude of whatever happened to Caitlin Flanagan as a teenager. I still think that the essence of her admonitions and fears seem to spring from a place of trauma, but do please take my analysis with several grains of salt.
Some masochistic, curious-as-a-cat-with-only-one-life-left part of me really wants to read Caitlin Flanagan's Girl Land. Now, I'm sort of broke (well, when am I not sort of broke?) so I don't really think I can shell out $30 for a hardcover I will probably want to burn after reading, so I probably won't read it, at least not until it hits paperback.
I feel like most of the coverage I've read about this book ignores a very crucial piece of information. The book has been excoriated as reactionary, and dangerously nostalgic. Flanagan herself has been called a "cranky, (prematurely) old church lady." There's an entertaining hour with her and Irin Carmon, resident feminist of Salon, on NPR's "On Point" that's been the fodder for quite a few blogs in recent days. In particular, the bit where Flanagan goes after Carmon for not having had a boyfriend in high school is almost laughable in its ridiculousness.
Basically, the condensed version of Flanagan's ideas and thesis (if you can call it a thesis?) is that adolescent girls today are being rushed out of their girlhoods by the Internet and pornography, and parents need to protect their girls from these pernicious and worldly influences so that they don't end up having a lot of sex with men who treat them badly. There's also a lot of discussion of "princess" ideals and tropes, which Flanagan adores. There's a lot of discussion out there that Flanagan's argument amounts to: (1) men only want sex; (2) women only want to be treated like princesses; (3) sex is dirty; (4) women have to use dirty sex to get men to treat them like princesses. There's an awful lot wrong with all of that, as I'm sure most of you will recognize. It leaves out any variation among female wants. It paints a pernicious and dangerous picture of men. It precludes the idea that men and women can ever be friends. It relies on gender stereotypes that are damaging to both men and women. And it straight-up calls sex something dirty.
All pretty reactionary, throwback, damaging ideas.
But in pretty much every piece I've read about this book, the incredibly salient fact of Flanagan's rape when she was a teenager is mentioned, and then glossed over in the analysis of her ideas.
So let me be the one to say it, I guess.
This is what sexual trama looks like.
Being forced out of one's girlhood by a violent act would leave someone with a pretty negative view of sex, don't you think? And in the culture of victim-blaming and rape-apology we live in, it's not hard to see how someone would fail to heal from that. It's not at all difficult to see how all that blame could be internalized into self-loathing.
OF COURSE Flanagan wants to protect girls; she wishes, I am certain, that someone had protected her. That her recipe for protection involves giving girls no tools for dealing with men and the world and the whirlpool of emotions that is sex is no surprise. She doesn't want to deal with any of those things.
Rape is a serious and incredibly damaging act. With every word I read about this woman, and with every harsh word I read about her prescriptions, I wince a little bit inside. When Carmon admonished Flanagan on "On Point" not to make this about her, or herself, I wanted to grab my radio and shake it. This book would seem to be about Flanagan, and her intensely personal wounds that have never healed. Please, please: make this conversation about her, because that's what it needs to be. Flanagan may be a social critic, but when her criticism and prescription come from such a place as I imagine they do, it must be understood that she's not talking about the world as it is, but the world as she understands it. And while it's always true that we each of us see the world through the prism of our experiences and unique perceptions, it's also likely true that Flanagan's perspective is far more skewed than most people's.
Stop piling on this poor woman. Yes, this may be exactly the thing that misogynists and zealots and morality legislators will hold up when they try to push agendas that curtail women's freedoms. And certainly Flanagan bears responsibility for her words. But still: I can't help but be overwhelmed with compassion every time I read anything about her.
Rape is trauma. And it should surprise no one that in a culture where Ben Roethlisberger makes millions in the NFL and Dominique Strauss-Kahn goes free and women are constantly told how to dress and act so that they will not be raped that Flanagan has a nostalgic longing for a time before she ever had to think about sex or worry about danger, and that she wants to keep girls in that safe space forever.
Some masochistic, curious-as-a-cat-with-only-one-life-left part of me really wants to read Caitlin Flanagan's Girl Land. Now, I'm sort of broke (well, when am I not sort of broke?) so I don't really think I can shell out $30 for a hardcover I will probably want to burn after reading, so I probably won't read it, at least not until it hits paperback.
I feel like most of the coverage I've read about this book ignores a very crucial piece of information. The book has been excoriated as reactionary, and dangerously nostalgic. Flanagan herself has been called a "cranky, (prematurely) old church lady." There's an entertaining hour with her and Irin Carmon, resident feminist of Salon, on NPR's "On Point" that's been the fodder for quite a few blogs in recent days. In particular, the bit where Flanagan goes after Carmon for not having had a boyfriend in high school is almost laughable in its ridiculousness.
Basically, the condensed version of Flanagan's ideas and thesis (if you can call it a thesis?) is that adolescent girls today are being rushed out of their girlhoods by the Internet and pornography, and parents need to protect their girls from these pernicious and worldly influences so that they don't end up having a lot of sex with men who treat them badly. There's also a lot of discussion of "princess" ideals and tropes, which Flanagan adores. There's a lot of discussion out there that Flanagan's argument amounts to: (1) men only want sex; (2) women only want to be treated like princesses; (3) sex is dirty; (4) women have to use dirty sex to get men to treat them like princesses. There's an awful lot wrong with all of that, as I'm sure most of you will recognize. It leaves out any variation among female wants. It paints a pernicious and dangerous picture of men. It precludes the idea that men and women can ever be friends. It relies on gender stereotypes that are damaging to both men and women. And it straight-up calls sex something dirty.
All pretty reactionary, throwback, damaging ideas.
But in pretty much every piece I've read about this book, the incredibly salient fact of Flanagan's rape when she was a teenager is mentioned, and then glossed over in the analysis of her ideas.
So let me be the one to say it, I guess.
This is what sexual trama looks like.
Being forced out of one's girlhood by a violent act would leave someone with a pretty negative view of sex, don't you think? And in the culture of victim-blaming and rape-apology we live in, it's not hard to see how someone would fail to heal from that. It's not at all difficult to see how all that blame could be internalized into self-loathing.
OF COURSE Flanagan wants to protect girls; she wishes, I am certain, that someone had protected her. That her recipe for protection involves giving girls no tools for dealing with men and the world and the whirlpool of emotions that is sex is no surprise. She doesn't want to deal with any of those things.
Rape is a serious and incredibly damaging act. With every word I read about this woman, and with every harsh word I read about her prescriptions, I wince a little bit inside. When Carmon admonished Flanagan on "On Point" not to make this about her, or herself, I wanted to grab my radio and shake it. This book would seem to be about Flanagan, and her intensely personal wounds that have never healed. Please, please: make this conversation about her, because that's what it needs to be. Flanagan may be a social critic, but when her criticism and prescription come from such a place as I imagine they do, it must be understood that she's not talking about the world as it is, but the world as she understands it. And while it's always true that we each of us see the world through the prism of our experiences and unique perceptions, it's also likely true that Flanagan's perspective is far more skewed than most people's.
Stop piling on this poor woman. Yes, this may be exactly the thing that misogynists and zealots and morality legislators will hold up when they try to push agendas that curtail women's freedoms. And certainly Flanagan bears responsibility for her words. But still: I can't help but be overwhelmed with compassion every time I read anything about her.
Rape is trauma. And it should surprise no one that in a culture where Ben Roethlisberger makes millions in the NFL and Dominique Strauss-Kahn goes free and women are constantly told how to dress and act so that they will not be raped that Flanagan has a nostalgic longing for a time before she ever had to think about sex or worry about danger, and that she wants to keep girls in that safe space forever.
Friday, January 6, 2012
I Don't Blink In Dreams
Sometimes I wonder what life would be like if you hadn’t absconded.
Sometimes I wonder what life would be like if you reappeared, magic, poof, a solid reality instead of the ephemeral set of memories I live with every day.
I dreamt about you. Recently. Not last night, not the night before that. Last week, maybe. I don’t remember, precisely. My memory was never good when it came to you. You were always about the moment. I was always in the moment with you, and time and detail ceased to matter. Who needs linear abstraction when there is so much else to pay attention to, so much that is real to feel? Who knows how long a second can be? I know that it can be an eternity. The second between the inhale and the exhale can be eternity. Who needs to remember the paintings in the Tate when I can say that every busker in London played “Wonderwall” whenever we walked by?
We looked at the paintings anyway. We sat through a lecture in the National Gallery. And when the dry woman with the dead-leaf voice was done telling us things we already knew about Adam and Eve and Eve in art and the place of the feminine in Christian-sponsored art, we escaped from the auditorium like children let out for recess and we skipped down the hallway giggling like mad things and we played hide-and-seek among the soldiers of the Terracotta Army until a burly, black-jacketed docent asked us to leave in politely threatening tones.
We knew the secret to removing ourselves from the ordered world, you and I.
But I dreamt you, recently. I dreamt you to my door and into my bedroom. We stood face to face, and I put the tips of my fingers on the sharp protrusion of your cheekbone. My right hand, your left cheek. Just so. Just the way we stood when you picked me up at Heathrow, that time you were late and I called and called and there was no answer and I worried and thought about taking a cab but didn’t know where to take it.
Remember?
You finally appeared. You were apologetic, profusely, abundantly apologetic.The tumble of words from your lips was torrential, neverending. I put my finger tips on your cheek. I didn’t trust myself to touch your lips; I didn’t trust you to have my skin against them. So I touched your cheekbone, instead.
You stopped talking.
We walked to your car together. You started talking again. We drove through the City center on the way to Rose Cottage; it was Sunday, it was late, there was no congestion charge. You played tour guide. I sat sideways, my back against the car door, my knees pulled up and my toes poking at the gear shifter. You put your hand on my ankle in between gears. You circled it completely in your hand, and I felt every callous and every training cut.
In my dream, you went to open up my skull, like you used to do, to swing it back on those ivory hinges you installed yourself, but I had changed the lock. Your key didn’t fit.
You laughed at me.
“Don’t you remember, love? I’m a thief. I’m a doorman. You can’t keep me out,” you said. Cocky cockney.
And you pulled out your kit, your picks and your wires, and you picked that bone lock on my forehead, right between my eyes. I watched you the whole time. I don’t blink, in dreams. I didn’t want to keep you out, you know. I changed the lock so that you’d have to touch me, take your time. I changed the lock to slow you down.
But then you’d done it, and my skull swung back on those ivory hinges you installed yourself, and your calloused fingers were in my brain, buried deep, all the way to the palm. I could feel the weight of your heavy hand on my frontal lobe, affecting my judgment.
The tips of your nails tickled my temporal lobe, and I remembered: living with you was like living in a dream. There was eternity in the space between inhaling and exhaling. I never blinked.
I have you in my dreams. I don’t need you in front of me anymore.
Sometimes I wonder what life would be like if you reappeared, magic, poof, a solid reality instead of the ephemeral set of memories I live with every day.
I dreamt about you. Recently. Not last night, not the night before that. Last week, maybe. I don’t remember, precisely. My memory was never good when it came to you. You were always about the moment. I was always in the moment with you, and time and detail ceased to matter. Who needs linear abstraction when there is so much else to pay attention to, so much that is real to feel? Who knows how long a second can be? I know that it can be an eternity. The second between the inhale and the exhale can be eternity. Who needs to remember the paintings in the Tate when I can say that every busker in London played “Wonderwall” whenever we walked by?
We looked at the paintings anyway. We sat through a lecture in the National Gallery. And when the dry woman with the dead-leaf voice was done telling us things we already knew about Adam and Eve and Eve in art and the place of the feminine in Christian-sponsored art, we escaped from the auditorium like children let out for recess and we skipped down the hallway giggling like mad things and we played hide-and-seek among the soldiers of the Terracotta Army until a burly, black-jacketed docent asked us to leave in politely threatening tones.
We knew the secret to removing ourselves from the ordered world, you and I.
But I dreamt you, recently. I dreamt you to my door and into my bedroom. We stood face to face, and I put the tips of my fingers on the sharp protrusion of your cheekbone. My right hand, your left cheek. Just so. Just the way we stood when you picked me up at Heathrow, that time you were late and I called and called and there was no answer and I worried and thought about taking a cab but didn’t know where to take it.
Remember?
You finally appeared. You were apologetic, profusely, abundantly apologetic.The tumble of words from your lips was torrential, neverending. I put my finger tips on your cheek. I didn’t trust myself to touch your lips; I didn’t trust you to have my skin against them. So I touched your cheekbone, instead.
You stopped talking.
We walked to your car together. You started talking again. We drove through the City center on the way to Rose Cottage; it was Sunday, it was late, there was no congestion charge. You played tour guide. I sat sideways, my back against the car door, my knees pulled up and my toes poking at the gear shifter. You put your hand on my ankle in between gears. You circled it completely in your hand, and I felt every callous and every training cut.
In my dream, you went to open up my skull, like you used to do, to swing it back on those ivory hinges you installed yourself, but I had changed the lock. Your key didn’t fit.
You laughed at me.
“Don’t you remember, love? I’m a thief. I’m a doorman. You can’t keep me out,” you said. Cocky cockney.
And you pulled out your kit, your picks and your wires, and you picked that bone lock on my forehead, right between my eyes. I watched you the whole time. I don’t blink, in dreams. I didn’t want to keep you out, you know. I changed the lock so that you’d have to touch me, take your time. I changed the lock to slow you down.
But then you’d done it, and my skull swung back on those ivory hinges you installed yourself, and your calloused fingers were in my brain, buried deep, all the way to the palm. I could feel the weight of your heavy hand on my frontal lobe, affecting my judgment.
The tips of your nails tickled my temporal lobe, and I remembered: living with you was like living in a dream. There was eternity in the space between inhaling and exhaling. I never blinked.
I have you in my dreams. I don’t need you in front of me anymore.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Aging
I think being old has snuck up on me, and then jumped me in a dark alley and forever left its mark on my life.
I'm 27. True fact. I've traveled the world, been married and divorced, given birth, been abandoned. Now I've got a job and a 401(k) and I drop my daughter at kindergarten every morning on my way into the office. She takes dance classes on Saturday. I schedule phone calls with my best friends. I shop online because it's easier. I have a cocktail or a beer after work. I'm in bed, asleep, by 10:30 most nights.
This is what old people life is like, isn't it?
I mean, I could still go out on Wednesday nights if I wanted to, but getting five hours of sleep and being slightly drunk when I wake up is hardly worth it when all that's going to happen is I'm going to go to a bar (alone), sit there (alone) and then go home (alone). Plus, I'll probably end up spending more money than I ought to, considering I really want to figure out a way to rationalize the purchase of a ridiculously expensive dress that I have nowhere to wear, and it's really hard to do that when you just dropped $25 on craft cocktails.
So basically, it's not worth it to go out and be wild and crazy and young. I don't want to go out unless I have guaranteed sparkling conversation. Which means plans made in advance, and I am so horrible at asking people to do things and most of the time it doesn't work out anyway. So why bother? I can watch Netflix in bed or write about theater events I haven't seen or read 10,000 word articles about Dominionism instead.
I'm old, guys. I'm a fuddy-duddy. A spinster.
It won't be long until my jowls start to sag and my tits are around my knees and I wear support stockings and complain about my knees. (Actually, I already have some serious wrinkles and I am more apt to complain about my cartilage-less hips. For real. They hurt.)
I'm old. It's pretty terrifying. I'm shallow, and so being old also means no longer being pretty, and that's really, really scary. I honestly don't know if my self-esteem will be able to handle the blow of no longer being looked at by men.
But it also means that nothing I accomplish between now and my death will be as notable as it might have been. I am not a prodigy. I am not a wunderkind. Even if I manage to publish a book or write for the New York Times or really just about anything that I might want to do, it won't be the kind of show-stopping accomplishment that it would have been if I'd done it young. Somewhere in my head, I wanted to be Tavi Gevinson, and now I have to deal with the fact that I'm not. I'm not that great. Even if I manage to accomplish great things eventually, I'll not be great-great, just normal-great.
Nothing will ever come ahead of schedule. Now I'm stuck in the local lanes, slogging my way through all that detritus.
I'm old. I'm scared. I guess this is growing up.
I'm 27. True fact. I've traveled the world, been married and divorced, given birth, been abandoned. Now I've got a job and a 401(k) and I drop my daughter at kindergarten every morning on my way into the office. She takes dance classes on Saturday. I schedule phone calls with my best friends. I shop online because it's easier. I have a cocktail or a beer after work. I'm in bed, asleep, by 10:30 most nights.
This is what old people life is like, isn't it?
I mean, I could still go out on Wednesday nights if I wanted to, but getting five hours of sleep and being slightly drunk when I wake up is hardly worth it when all that's going to happen is I'm going to go to a bar (alone), sit there (alone) and then go home (alone). Plus, I'll probably end up spending more money than I ought to, considering I really want to figure out a way to rationalize the purchase of a ridiculously expensive dress that I have nowhere to wear, and it's really hard to do that when you just dropped $25 on craft cocktails.
So basically, it's not worth it to go out and be wild and crazy and young. I don't want to go out unless I have guaranteed sparkling conversation. Which means plans made in advance, and I am so horrible at asking people to do things and most of the time it doesn't work out anyway. So why bother? I can watch Netflix in bed or write about theater events I haven't seen or read 10,000 word articles about Dominionism instead.
I'm old, guys. I'm a fuddy-duddy. A spinster.
It won't be long until my jowls start to sag and my tits are around my knees and I wear support stockings and complain about my knees. (Actually, I already have some serious wrinkles and I am more apt to complain about my cartilage-less hips. For real. They hurt.)
I'm old. It's pretty terrifying. I'm shallow, and so being old also means no longer being pretty, and that's really, really scary. I honestly don't know if my self-esteem will be able to handle the blow of no longer being looked at by men.
But it also means that nothing I accomplish between now and my death will be as notable as it might have been. I am not a prodigy. I am not a wunderkind. Even if I manage to publish a book or write for the New York Times or really just about anything that I might want to do, it won't be the kind of show-stopping accomplishment that it would have been if I'd done it young. Somewhere in my head, I wanted to be Tavi Gevinson, and now I have to deal with the fact that I'm not. I'm not that great. Even if I manage to accomplish great things eventually, I'll not be great-great, just normal-great.
Nothing will ever come ahead of schedule. Now I'm stuck in the local lanes, slogging my way through all that detritus.
I'm old. I'm scared. I guess this is growing up.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Work-in-Progress
I am a work-in-progress. There's nothing at all complete or finished or polished about me. I say the wrong things at the wrong times, I stay out too late, I don't get enough sleep, I can be unbelievably crass and at other times inexcusably thoughtless. I let go too easily, or else I hang on too long.
Most notably, I make the same mistakes, over and over and over again. Each time, it feels like a new mistake. But it's not. It's the same one, dressed up in new packaging so my poor pathetic and remarkably insecure head can fool itself into thinking that it's not about to do a real number on my long-suffering heart, who always seems to bear the brunt of these mistakes I make.
(If my body parts were relationship archetypes, my head would be the wife beater and my heart the battered wife. Right down to my head always telling my heart, "This is your fault. You deserve this." No joke. Ha.)
But I do. I make the same mistake, time and time again. I think that if I care enough, someone will care about me. I think that if I can just give enough, I'll get something back. In a far less positive light, you might say that I have a tendency to attach to anyone that shows me the least affection. God knows why, but I seem to be starved for attention. I just want someone to notice me, care, and continue to do so in perpetuity.
Isn't that what love is?
But this is not about love. I don't want to talk about love. Talking about love is like dancing about architecture.
This is about my eager-puppy syndrome, the one that keeps coming back after it's been kicked. This is about my attention-whorish bids for attention when I'm feeling down. This is about the fact that I seem to have no boundaries. I will give anyone whatever they ask of me, if they just hint that they might, at some point, maybe, in the future, reciprocate.
That's just bad business sense, right there. Can you believe I work in accounting? I can't. It's a good thing I don't set policy, just balance accounts. We'd be bankrupt.
I am bankrupt. I've given away so much for nothing but IOU's that turned out to be not worth the ink they were written with. I've given away huge chunks of my heart, of my self-respect, of my energy. And I don't really have enough left any more to cover my responsibilities. I am emotionally bankrupt. Also exhausted.
But how does one unlearn the behavior patterns of a lifetime? I don't even know where they come from; I got plenty of love and affection and attention as a child. I was not an abused youth.
How do I unlearn this impulse to give and give and give and hope that someday it'll come back to me? How do I forget everything I believe about karma and do unto others? And do I really want to?
No.
Why don't the rest of you join my world. Because, while I may be occasionally needy and while I may be occasionally childish and while I may occasionally display a level of immaturity that shocks the senses, we would all be much better off if we all gave instead of taking, if we all sometimes or even often did things without having a firm expectation of reciprocation in mind.
A little naivete goes a long way towards making the world better.
Most notably, I make the same mistakes, over and over and over again. Each time, it feels like a new mistake. But it's not. It's the same one, dressed up in new packaging so my poor pathetic and remarkably insecure head can fool itself into thinking that it's not about to do a real number on my long-suffering heart, who always seems to bear the brunt of these mistakes I make.
(If my body parts were relationship archetypes, my head would be the wife beater and my heart the battered wife. Right down to my head always telling my heart, "This is your fault. You deserve this." No joke. Ha.)
But I do. I make the same mistake, time and time again. I think that if I care enough, someone will care about me. I think that if I can just give enough, I'll get something back. In a far less positive light, you might say that I have a tendency to attach to anyone that shows me the least affection. God knows why, but I seem to be starved for attention. I just want someone to notice me, care, and continue to do so in perpetuity.
Isn't that what love is?
But this is not about love. I don't want to talk about love. Talking about love is like dancing about architecture.
This is about my eager-puppy syndrome, the one that keeps coming back after it's been kicked. This is about my attention-whorish bids for attention when I'm feeling down. This is about the fact that I seem to have no boundaries. I will give anyone whatever they ask of me, if they just hint that they might, at some point, maybe, in the future, reciprocate.
That's just bad business sense, right there. Can you believe I work in accounting? I can't. It's a good thing I don't set policy, just balance accounts. We'd be bankrupt.
I am bankrupt. I've given away so much for nothing but IOU's that turned out to be not worth the ink they were written with. I've given away huge chunks of my heart, of my self-respect, of my energy. And I don't really have enough left any more to cover my responsibilities. I am emotionally bankrupt. Also exhausted.
But how does one unlearn the behavior patterns of a lifetime? I don't even know where they come from; I got plenty of love and affection and attention as a child. I was not an abused youth.
How do I unlearn this impulse to give and give and give and hope that someday it'll come back to me? How do I forget everything I believe about karma and do unto others? And do I really want to?
No.
Why don't the rest of you join my world. Because, while I may be occasionally needy and while I may be occasionally childish and while I may occasionally display a level of immaturity that shocks the senses, we would all be much better off if we all gave instead of taking, if we all sometimes or even often did things without having a firm expectation of reciprocation in mind.
A little naivete goes a long way towards making the world better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)