Rashomon

I'd heard of this story in concept in my mid teens; when I was 16 to be precise. The idea of 4 people who each have different versions of what happened. I bought a VCD some time ago and finally watched it maybe 3 weeks ago on a lazy rainy weekend. SO was bored silly, it's not an action movie, nor is there much dialogue. But here's the thing.

Anybody who reads this probably has already read the plot summary on Wikipedia so I'm not spoiling anything I hope? The fact is that a man is dead, and there is an enquiry on how he died. There are 3 people involved, the dead man, his wife and a bandit. Each of whom has a version. Interestingly, all versions involve admitting guilt, and yet, they're contradictory. So the bandit says he killed the man, the wife says she killed the man and the dead man says it was suicide. There's a by-stander who says that the bandit killed the man.

As a lay human being, who knows she's watching a movie, I can say it doesn't matter. All the people involved agree that the man is dead and that a bandit had sex with his wife. How does it matter who killed him or why?

But as a part of society, if this were to really happen, there are several decisions which would become very difficult. For instance, if it was suicide, then nobody else needs to be punished, except if the sex was a rape. If it wasn't suicide and the wife killed him in a fit of rage (after having been raped by the bandit and insulted by her husband), then it's not premeditated murder and she might be able to claim temporary insanity due to rage. If the bandit killed him in a duel for the woman, then it's still not premeditated murder, but the wife is also guilty for having urged the bandit on.

In each of these scenarios, the 'truth' is only the judge believing one person's version of events, or looking at the versions that corroborate each other the most. In this case, the story itself does not allow for much corroboration around the killing or indeed the reason for the killing.

So... what would we do in a civil society? Who would we punish and for what? This is the question that Rashomon leaves me with.

That's the Man

I want...

I want a man who knows that at the end of a difficult day/week, I want to be cuddled. Properly cuddled, to have him wrap himself around me so the only thing I can hear is his heartbeat and breathing and the rest of the world recedes away into silence.

The voices that clamour daily about how I need to do stuff are silent, the voices in my head telling me I'm not doing enough are silent. The voices that tell me that it's all going to hell are silent. And I can only hear him, as he tells me that it will all be ok. And I believe him.

I want a man who knows how to love. Who knows that sex is one part of it, the release of a specific tension, like eating for hunger, but that making love is much more. An expression of an emotion, a very special emotion, that needs special expression. Who is willing to take the time it takes to let me feel his love. Who appreciates that I start things up, that I keep things going, that I do what I do, to show him my love. That sometimes it's hunger, but sometimes it IS love. And when it's rejected, it hurts the love.

But hey, everybody wants stuff...

Another Something

I use this blog sometimes as a personal dumping ground, for thoughts and notes that I want to keep around me. This is another one of those, like Rudyard Kipling's 'If'. It's about men, but this is what I aspire to be - a thinking human being:

"The mark of the man of the world is absence of pretension. He does not make a speech; he takes a low business-tone, avoids all brag, is nobody, dresses plainly, promises not at all, performs much, speaks in monosyllables, hugs his fact. He calls his employment by its lowest name, and so takes from evil tongues their sharpest weapon. His conversation clings to the weather and the news, yet he allows himself to be surprised into thought, and the unlocking of his learning and philosophy." Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Take Your Breath Away

I'm not young anymore,
Except in my mind.
I'm not fit now,
But maybe in a while.
I'm not new anymore,
Maybe less enticing,
But I'm still me.

I'm not just smart now,
I'm wiser,
I'm not just goofy,
I'm humourous.
I'm not just good,
I'm kind,
And I love you.

Maybe I never did before,
But now more than ever
I need you to tell me
I take your breath away.

I'm older but better
Sometimes in every way.
I can tell myself this,
But it's better when you say,
I take your breath away.

Falling Is Like...

I'm working on a slightly newer me. the same person and personality, but fixing my external appearance to match what I feel inside. It started with a hair cut, which all viewers agree has shaved several years off my appearance. I'm working on exercise to make my body feel its true age, but I'll wait a while before I confirm the success of that program.

Maybe it's related, maybe it's the weather, but with this comes the feeling that I want to be 'in love' again. Falling in love is easy, it's fun and it's beautiful. Falling out of love... happens painlessly when you're not looking for a relationship. When you're in a relationship, or the relationship ends prematurely... I had to force myself out of love. It was very hard. It's not something I want to do again, fall out of love. Listening to the songs I listened to then, triggers the same responses, deep sadness at having to end something that was special, and had potential. That one, only had potential for me and not for the man I was with, so it had to end, but that didn't make it any easier.

Every so often, I fall in love with my husband again. Not because I've fallen out of love with him, but because he's changed a bit, or I've changed a bit, or because I've forgotten little bits of what he's like or something. Maybe it's also the weather, but now, I'm looking for my husband again - to fall in love once more, like trying to fight gravity on a planet that insists that love is like falling, and falling is like this (Ani DiFranco).

There's Something Wrong with the World Today

I was disturbed when I heard about Switzerland banning minarets, there's ongoing discussion about banning the Burqa in a few countries in Europe, and now this http://sify.com/news/opposition-to-mosques-in-us-on-the-rise-observers-news-international-khvnafgjbig.html.

What ever happened to the Freedom to Practice Religion? Isn't it something that we've all been told is important and must be protected? Do you then start checking people at your borders, asking what their religious views are before you'll let them in? Isn't it blatant hypocrisy to allow their money in without any questions, but not to allow their faith?

And where have all the voices gone that constantly warn that one day it will be your turn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...) that authoritarian rule is never the answer, that people are people.

At times, I didn't know what to say, whether I had a right to say anything, but this is going too far. We have got to stop having knee jerk reactions to things that we've not considered before. People who are rational and sensible in their dealings with work and family turn oddly rabid when they discuss religion, believing that somehow a religion is responsible for the quirks of an individual. Surely we have thieves of every religion and denomination? We have the corrupt, the wife beaters, the child abusers, none of these can be separated out due to religion and it's even likely that every religion will swear that it is indeed the lack of religion that made them so.

Why have we all turned into this weird bunch of reactionaries? Demanding that Islam be limited to countries that are willing to declare themselves 'Islamic' and that Muslims in any other country hide their faith? Do we require that Hindus not wear caste marks? Do we force Christians to put away their rosaries and other signs of faith? Why are we becoming intolerant of an entire religion because of a few people? I've said this once and I'll say it again we have terrorists of all religions. I know of Hindu terrorists, Christian terrorists, Sikh terrorists and Muslim terrorists. Yet nobody is prohibiting the construction of temples or churches.

We need to stop and think. What are we setting ourselves up for here? A culture of hate and intolerance? Is that the future we want to leave our children?

Romance

I've called myself a romantic, incurable at best and implacable at worst, but of late, I'm wondering more and more what that means. I grew up in a practical family, where parents didn't have time for grand gestures of love for each other, but have stayed together nonetheless. Is that romantic? Perhaps not. So what was I looking for? Someone to sweep me off my feet? Not really - or at any rate, not any more. I quite like my feet and making my own decisions. I guess the part that appealed to me most was that someone would unexpectedly be drawn to you, and would want to be with you, no matter what. Disaster, disease, disability, disdain, none of this would push them away. In retrospect, completely stalker-ish.

So what is it? What do I want? I'll confess, I still miss the romantic, and at some level believe there are romantic men, but if a non-romantic man asked me what it is, what does he need to do? Indeed... what?

After much analysis, it turns out that it's what a man does that makes his woman feel special. Parts of it relate to her being a woman (therefore probably applicable across the board) but most of it relate specifically to her. For instance, most women like a man who opens doors for them, not because they cannot do it, but because it shows consideration. I do it myself, because it shows consideration. But If my husband gets to the door before me and opens it for me when I'm on the phone, that's romantic. When my husband knows that I don't like a particular vegetable much so ensures there's an alternative when it's prepared at his parents' place, that's romantic. Yes?

There's still something niggling, something that I only felt once in my life. I was in a bit of a flap due to some circumstances, and a person I was hanging out with (he is 3 years younger and I had very strict rules about these things those days) said to me, 'don't worry, I'm there.' He couldn't have done much to remedy the situation or anything, but it was just an assurance that he would be there through it. I felt more special than I wanted to in that situation, and whether he meant it or not... I began avoiding him.

I guess to me, given my various relationships, insecurity is the biggest challenge. I usually feel alone and when things start stacking up, that's the biggest fear - that I'll have to deal with it all alone.

So in the ultimate analysis, romance is what makes the other person feel special, and for me, the ultimate in romance is knowing that I'll never be alone. Now, if only my subconscious would react appropriately :)

Fingers Crossed

My cousin, the one who's in her second marriage, with two babies, is due to meet her husband this evening. Apparently they met by chance on the weekend and clearly had a civilized conversation, and they're going to have another one today. There were some tensions in the middle, with emails flying fast and furious, copying people who had no business knowing what was going on between the two of them (like my parents, my brother and I) but maybe that's all at an end.

I am very afraid for her because she's head-strong and pampered to a large extent. I'm head-strong too, but have learnt over the years to recognize that I can be wrong, and to listen to a few people in some degree of detail. These people are friends and family, but they're also my weather-vanes, showing me myself. I'm afraid that my cousin, like our family is wont to do, has pushed away people like that from her life, making the rest of us afraid to point out that she can be wrong. Again, this is not to say that her husband is correct, he is deathly wrong in his own way, but he is probably right in some ways. My cousin has a blind spot when it comes to money, never having to earn a living, or having to survive by what she earned. Where I'm comfortable in the knowledge that my education and experience will see me through the rest of my life comfortably, she cannot say that at all. On the flip-side, she's very comfortable spending. She thinks she's aware of money, but she's probably penny wise, pound foolish. She feels entitled to an evening out every week, spending money that she's not earning. While she is a full-time mom, and I can understand that that is frustrating and tiring, asking your mother to baby-sit, so that you can have an evening out with your friends, spending a fair bit of money that your parents are giving you... feels wrong. But again, who am I to judge?

Her husband has not been the most mature about any of this, and at some level, neither has my cousin. The best case is they decide to start with a clean slate with each other, hopefully remembering the affection, but putting all the unpleasantness behind them, never to be referred to again. The worst case is they try again and fall into the same traps of anger, frustration, passive-aggression etc.

Families are what they are, imperfect, but loving at best. Parents are people, but when children are very young, they need to put aside their personalities and concentrate on the children. This is not something I've seriously thought about, but something that now makes perfect sense to me. The parent who is the primary care-giver, doesn't have any time or mental space, for anything apart from care-giving for the first few years of the child's life. Given the way life is these days, several people have children with a gap of two years or so. This means, in the parents' lives, there is a lull in personal relationship for something like six or seven years. The time during which children need full time care (the elder one gets this for 3 years, then the second one gets their 3 years), is the time when parents need to be very secure in the relationship - which is technically the security that marriage provides. The security that though you don't have time for each other just yet, you will find that time, because you have the rest of your lives. The insecure spouse will feel ousted by the child/children, and after a few attempts at date-nights or some other contrived experience to reclaim what existed before, will move on. The secure spouse will participate in child-rearing, realising that this is a way for the relationship to grow and mature, a new phase of marital life, which has its own ups and downs.

I'm not saying anybody is justified in completely ignoring their spouse or indeed themselves, but the secondary care-giver must understand how difficult it is, and what a toll it takes. Several people do this without thinking, decide to have children, stay at home to take care of them, then wonder why they're fighting more with their spouse etc., without realising that the situation is fraught with various tensions.

Though I've been waiting to have my own children, every year that I don't adds some insights that I believe will make me a better parent if I get the opportunity, but insights that will make me a better person in general.

For my cousin, I've my fingers crossed that all will end well for the time being, and being adults, they can work on their relationship to take it where they want.

100% Pure Lust!

Aaah... Cristiano Ronaldo.... thank you Google Image Search!

In Which I Confirm that I'm Stoic

When I was in school, we had to learn Julius Caesar. Our teacher took some trouble to explain philosophies and the like, because, if I remember correctly, Cassius was Stoic. The explanation and the definition at that time, made them sound cold and unfeeling. The philosophy was being separate from events, so that you aren't destroyed by events, but if you're untouched by events, my sixteen year old self reasoned, you've to be cold and unfeeling.

Then my life happened, I studied more, I worked hard, I had set-backs in my personal and professional life and I stopped and thought. People behaved incomprehensibly, things happened that had no business happening at all! And I thought about all of this, about how angry I was with these people and these things. People that I otherwise liked and even loved. What's the option, I thought. How do I reconcile that people whom I like and love, and will continue to love, do such incomprehensible things? And the only complete answer I could find, is that they will do what they do, I can only react to those things. And my reaction does not need to be incomprehensible. In fact, the one thing I take trouble to do, is to process thoughts and feelings before voicing them, because my reaction is now a 'thing' for someone else. Do I think people are wrong? Often. Do I shout from the rooftops that they are wrong? Almost never. Why? Because I cannot choose what happens, I can only choose how I react to the happenings.

How Low Can You Go...

I had expected that life would have a trajectory. Upto some point, I would be learning, and after some point I would be teaching. If you assume the average person lives about 80 years, then you learn roughly upto 50-55, and then you teach. Maybe this is true?

The cousin-in-law may have learnt much from his mother, and I'm in shock. At the meeting with his estranged wife, the meeting in which my father-in-law saw an over-aggressive girl and an apologetic boy, the cousin-in-law also alleged that his wife had tried to seduce his own cousin. He said that his mother had said her sister-in-law (the boy in question's mother) had told her that the girl was behaving inappropriately with her son. Now, those of us that know the mothers in question, know that they would never have this conversation. The girl's family promptly called up 'the boy in question's mother' and she swore up and down that she had said no such thing. Her husband was present, heard this, and said nothing at all. My father-in-law, who was present, said nothing of this incident to anybody.

The net result being that the cousin-in-law and his mother now have my father-in-law's support and are being painted many shades of white within the family. Those of us that know his mother and his ex-wife, know which side is what colour. The pain here is, that they used my father-in-law very thoroughly. Used him, knowing that he would not be able to see their machinations, that he would listen to the words, not the tone, that they lucked out when the girl's family lost their temper and he couldn't understand their rage.

They used a man who has only their welfare at heart, who only wanted to see if a family could be re-united and if a disabled child could get the support he needs. Used him to re-establish some sense of respect that they had in a family that they meet occasionally. Apparently humans are plumbing new depths every day.

Ke Dil Abhi Bhara Nahin

In the past week, I've got the final word one one marriage that was in shambles, and news that another marriage has ended. The first one is a cousin-in-law by marriage, the second is my cousin, whose second marriage it is.

When my cousin said she was getting remarried and with all the time I spent with her and her new husband, I kept wanting to ask, why will this one work when the previous one didn't? We're all human, we all have quirks and habits that are endearing and exasperating, which means that sooner or later, everybody will exasperate you, and you will exasperate them. What then do you have to look forward to in a long term relationship? I think it's the idea that both of you want similar things from life, and truly enjoy each other's company. I've thought about this quite a bit because there was a time when I considered leaving the SO, and in self-analysis, realised that I wanted to be with someone, and someone else, would have their own issues and the like - just like SO does.

Now, my cousin is on the verge of a second divorce, this marriage leaving her with 2 little children (the older is 4, born the year his parents got married). She's also not spent much time working, and now needs to find a job that will support her family. I can't help but hate the man that would leave his family in these straits. He's nice, fun, charming, funny, intelligent, and apparently selfish. He would naturally argue that he's desperately unhappy in this marriage, and staying with them would hurt him immeasurably, but is this the answer? It's not a bad answer, I'll give him that - it's an 'It's not you, it's me' answer, which is fine. But it's not acceptable.

The cousin-in-law in the first marriage, bought his wife and disabled child flight tickets to her parents house in October last year, because she did something he repeatedly told her not to. She was devastated, and when she overcame the grief to some extent, she called his extended family and told them stuff about him and what he thought of them. She also said that he was an intensely jealous husband who did not spend any money on the treatment of his child and did not give her sufficient money for household expenses. Since he sent her away, he had not attempted to meet her. They met on the weekend that just passed, because my father-in-law organized a meeting. My father-in-law feels that in the meeting, the girl's family came off badly because they shouted a lot, made random accusations and unsubstantiated allegations. The girl's family believes that the cousin-in-law came off badly because he alleged that she was of loose character (yet again). Only SO and I presently know both sides of this, because I know the girl's sister. I'm not in favour of telling anybody else, including my father-in-law, because the outcome of the meeting is that the pair should separate. It is probably best for each side to feel they got the better deal so I shall hold my peace.

The reason for the title is that maybe that's what marriages and relationships are about. You hang on till you're satiated and then you let go. I believe we learn from everybody in our lives, useful lessons which may not always be pleasant, but lessons nonetheless. I've used this to my advantage in my professional life, and though I've not really 'used' this in my personal life, I can see that my deepest attachments are to people who are constantly thinking, learning and growing. The times I've had serious issues with SO are times when I feel we're not growing as a couple. I think I still have a lot to learn from SO so there's still life left in 'us'.

Not so Afeared

My body cooperates at its own pace. Clearly I was not pregnant and after holding out for many weeks, it confessed that it wasn't either. Now to see if I can school it into submission to my will, or will be forced to acknowledge the Horrorscope.

Rene's the Man

It runs away with me,
My errant brain.
Leaping from thought to mood
From word to phrase.
Caffeine induced or crazed,
With the need to speak my mind.


It's agitated, I am agitated.
But not in a bad way,
Not troubled or sad.
I've been here before,
Words and thoughts tumbling out,
No coherence, just a cascade.
I miss it when it's absent,
This churning of thoughts within,
My creation of something...
Worthwhile or otherwise,
Completely mine.

He was right you know,
Right about me at any rate.
I think, therefore I am.

Afeared

I was good about exercise through April, 3 days a week through the month. I was feeling better, body was getting a little better. May has been bad, maybe 2 days of exercise in the whole month - though I'm re-motivated now. Why? Because Aunty Flo has been missing!! 45 days and no sign of the woman! I was eating better and exercising, I expected my standard cycle, which was about 35 days but no sign. The depressing side is that I cannot even remotely be pregnant, so it's just that my insides are not working. Which is making me mighty afeared!

Something I want to Remember

The Invitation
Oriah Mountain Dreamer
Canadian Teacher and Author


It doesn't interest me what you do for a living
I want to know what you ache for
and if you dare to dream of meeting your heart's longing.

It doesn't interest me how old you are
I want to know if you will risk looking like a fool
for love
for your dreams
for the adventure of being alive.

It doesn't interest me what planets are squaring your moon...
I want to know if you have touched the center of your own sorrow
if you have been opened by life's betrayals
or have become shrivelled and closed
from fear of further pain.

I want to know if you can sit with pain
mine or your own
without moving to hide it
or fade it
or fix it.

I want to know if you can be with joy
mine or your own
if you can dance with wildness
and let the ecstasy fill you to the tips of your
fingers and toes
without cautioning us to
be careful
be realistic
to remember the limitations of being human.

It doesn't interest me if the story you are telling me
is true.
I want to know if you can
disappoint another
to be true to yourself.

If you can bear the accusation of betrayal
and not betray your own soul.
If you can be faithless
and therefore trustworthy.

I want to know if you can see Beauty
even when it is not pretty
every day.
And if you can source your own life
from its presence.

I want to know if you can live with failure
yours and mine
and still stand on the edge of the lake
and shout to the silver of the full moon,
"Yes."

It doesn't interest me
to know where you live or how much money you have.
I want to know if you can get up
after a night of grief and despair
weary and bruised to the bone
and do what needs to be done
to feed the children.

It doesn't interest me who you know
or how you came to be here.
I want to know if you will stand
in the center of the fire
with me
and not shrink back.

It doesn't interest me where or what or with whom
you have studied.
I want to know what sustains you
from the inside
when all else falls away.

I want to know if you can be alone
with yourself
and if you truly like the company you keep
in the empty moments.


© 1995 by Oriah House, From "Dreams Of Desire"
Published by Mountain Dreaming, 300 Coxwell Avenue, Box 22546, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4L 2A0

Baby and Horrorscope

No, it's not a spelling mistake. SO's just quit his job (one that he's not happy at) but he doesn't have anything in hand, so naturally his family is upset/worried. Some people are able to understand that if there are two earning members in a household, one can quit without plan, and the world doesn't end. Those that aren't able to understand panic a bit. My mother-in-law chose to panic a bit, the panic taking the form of contacting an astrologer. Again, I have nothing against astrologers, except that they trade in fear. The MIL is convinced that she has to have some pujas done to spare SO from the painful effects of his own short-temper. An aside that the astrologer lady told her, is that we (SO and I) are not having children because we are not interested. The SO heard this from his mother, and didn't tell me till it came out in some random conversation.

To say I was upset would be a tad understating it. I bawled a few buckets and got slightly more upset when SO said that my date and time of birth are required to ascertain how bad his situation is. While the information is collected for purposes of job assurance, what if it is used for fertility analysis? And what if random astrologer person swears that the 'khot' is in my horrorscope and not SO's? This is more distressing because I want a child much more than SO does, and I suspect SO has a more serious medical condition than my self-diagnosed PCOS. What if my horrorscope shows none of this but declares that I will not have children? He's already presumed able, and I'm declared feeble!

On the up-side, I spoke to my MIL recently and she didn't ask me for any time of birth, so I'm hoping that she's either given up or forgotten, so this question is either dead or postponed. The angst it caused me though, is quite significant. I'm not sure it's done with (considering SO and I have been wed for 2.5 years), but hopefully I will not hear of it again.

Diplomacy and Politics

I was travelling for a while and am experiencing a vague sort of dissatisfaction with my life, which is why I've not expressed any opinions about Shashi Tharoor and his downfall. When he entered politics, like all citizens who are looking for new brooms, I was hopeful. Then came the reckless tweets and now this.

My opinion is that he's a diplomat, but hasn't realised that there is a difference between diplomacy and politics. Diplomacy seems to be about deciding what truths to tell, politics appears to be about how well you can weather filth. Nobody has a blameless existence, but Indian politicians appear to first learn how to ensure that no blame attaches to them, then they learn how to make innocent acts appear vile and filthy, then they learn about how to accumulate power, and finally, how to retain power. Governance, good or otherwise, doesn't appear to feature too much.

Looking at it from the bewildered eyes of Mr. T, it seems like he made a few calls to help someone who asked for help, and they offered him a reward. He refused the reward because he is a public servant, but upon being pressed to accept their 'generosity' he directed it towards a friend, in what he thought was another good turn. What an expensive set of favours it has proved to be for him.

I'd like to think I'm good at recognizing opportunities for doing and seeking favours. This, I think, is the basis of politics. Everybody has convictions and beliefs, but building consensus and coalition depends as much on people believing that you can help them, as it does on people believing in you and your convictions/beliefs. The mass of voters need to believe in you to cast their vote, but the people who will help you reach the masses need to believe in your ability to help them. The fine line is the help you are willing to provide. You could help a legitimate project get legitimate clearances with all procedures followed, so that social good is done, or you could help an illegitimate project get clearances so that the entrepreneur is enriched, or somewhere in between. And you must be aware that your enemies can make one look like the other, with no effort at all.

When I was younger, I recognized that politics was a very dirty game and thought that the most easy way to uplift India was through the Civil Services. However, not being fond of examinations and fairly confident that the life was not for me, I didn't pursue that route. Now, I still think it's the best way to work.

Coming back to Sashi Tharoor, he confused diplomacy with politics and has learnt that the two are very different. He has the rest of his term to serve out his constituency and try in little ways to make improvements to the daily lives of his people. Not a mean task if he manages it, but not as impressive as what he could have achieved, if he spent some time learning the ropes first?

Confidence

For a variety of reasons, I wasn't the most confident of children or young adults. This carried though into my twenties,and with each year of my thirties, I find that I'm growing in confidence. Professional first, and now personal. It's about knowing that I'm a good person and slowly working on myself till I'm happy with me and my body. I'm quite happy with me, and for the past 3 weeks, I've been exercising at least 3 days a week for half an hour a day, meaning I'm growing more happy with my body. It's a minor thing but it helps a lot.

The thing is, that for many years I believed that no man that I liked would like me. My first boyfriend was not one that I had a crush on, though my second was and SO certainly is. Insecurity about this 'liking' thing, always meant that I was afraid of ending up alone. Something that I certainly do not want. So now If I'm on a path away from that insecurity, what does it mean? Just that I'm much more comfortable in my own skin. I may never be super-fit, or have a flat stomach, but I can control my health and look the way I choose. This is rather a key realisation for me, as till now I believed that the way I looked was beyond my control. This might be one of my biggest personal achievements for 2010!

Mid-30s Drama Queen

I am having an email fight with my father in which I'd like to believe I appear slightly more mature. It's interesting, but makes it clear to my why I'm such a drama queen. I inherited the talent from my father. My mother does fly off the handle and overreact, but she's much better these days. My father has the 'rage'. He's the one who'll go quiet and cold waiting till he gets the apology that he wants. I do almost exactly the same with SO, regularly. I used to think that my mother had a bee in her bonnet about being right, I'm slowly learning that my father is worse, but less communicative, so it's harder to explain or pacify etc.

In the recent past, my father has done a lot more of the 'being childish' bits. Maybe he's always been like that and when I was a child I didn't notice it and for some years my mother handled it. The real fear I have is that my father will not mellow into maturity, taking offence at everything that his children say to him, or don't say to him. Forgetting that they are very much like him, hot-headed and slow to forgive.

For today though, I'm a child who's hurt her father and doesn't want to apologise because she doesn't think she's wrong. It would appear that my father is throwing a tantrum, but maybe I am.

Come On People!

So now it's Sandra Bullock's husband. Ok, Jesse James if you must. Explain something to me, it's not bad enough that her husband cheats, but she needs to have the entire country know about it, because somebody offered the other woman money for the story? Isn't that at least a little disgusting? If I'm not wrong, Tiger's girlfriends also got money for their stories.

What's the thinking here? They have a story, they might as well get some money from telling it? Why encourage them to tell it at all? Has the country absolved these women of any role in an affair with a married man? Is it now all down to the man to stand firm and reject any form of temptation?

I'm not defending cheating, not at all, but it does take 2 to cheat doesn't it? Is their logic 'he would have cheated with someone, why not me?' Do they expect the world to believe that the fact that these guys are celebrities had nothing to do with it? What's the next step? For a media company to launch a sting operation where some chick tries to seduce a happily married celebrity?

There's something wrong with the world today!

Thank You!

Thank you
For each time you were cold
And I tried to warm you up
For each time you were distant
And I tried to build the bridge
For each time you snapped
And I looked on bewildered,
For all the times you were you
And I was unsure

Over the years
I've built myself over
Learning to know me
A me you don't see
Or don't see all the time
A me that is special and fabulous
A me that is independent of you.

Thank you
For showing me me.
Now I know it's not me, it's you
And one day, it may be only you.

Agony Aunties

I had always fancied myself being one, till I decided that it caused more problems than it resolved. Then I firmly got out of the business of giving advice except when asked, when I would say 'what I would do is...' to make it clear that it's only my opinion.

Over the years though, I've apparently become known for having a cool head and making sensible decisions, so people sometimes as me for opinions. And some people ask me for opinions all the time. In this latter category falls the friend who I unwittingly recruited into my organization. I'm guessing her work is still ok, so I don't need to feel guilty, but it sometimes causes more work for me :)

She's in a very different position in life - she has 2 children who are 5 and 2, she hasn't worked full-time in a few years and wanted to re-join the full time work force, though she was doing useful part-time work. So she did, but has throughout been conflicted about her children. The older one had a tough time because at the time when she chose to go back to work, her husband took a job in another city (after having been home for 8 months). That got resolved eventually, with the husband returning to this city with a new job. Now, her younger child is ill. And for some reason, she thought I might have suggestions about what she could possibly do. 'What if the doctor says my child shouldn't stay at day-care?' she asks me.

The only answer I could think of for a few minutes was WTF? How on earth am I supposed to know? I'm not her, I have no children, nobody's ill, and I'm not the kind that worries about getting stuff done, I typically just get down to doing it.

Anyway, I directed her to her boss, who would certainly have some guidance on this and really should have been her first port of call. I honestly could not care less that her child is ill. I sympathize, but it's not something that I can do anything about and it doesn't affect me.

I guess it struck me as being a tad weird - maybe I'm not as nice as I thought, but honestly - it doesn't count as 'bad news' in my life if my friends or their children are ill. It counts as bad news if they've broken something (the friend) or the child is hospitalized, or some family member is critical, or someone lost their job etc. Maybe I'm a heartless bitch :)

Disposition and Predisposition

Personalities are based on numerous things we're told. Genes, upbringing, conditioning etc. In my case, I'd have to agree - all these play a part. I react sometimes based on innate responses (like anger), sometimes based on principles, and sometimes based on mood. Maybe there are more classifications - but you get the drift. A lot of these can be attributed to my genetic structure and a lot to the way I was brought up. But can all of it? At some point I broke with 'family' I had my own experiences and thoughts and could make up my own mind. But maybe that just means that I'm 'hardy'.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200912/dobbs-orchid-gene A cousin-in-law posted this article on Facebook and I loved reading it. It suggests that people who are hurt the most by the slings and arrows of a difficult upbringing, also have the most to contribute to society. Not by virtue of their upbringing, but by virtue of their sensitivity, creativity, or other such trait. They feel more strongly, so they may do more. It suggests that the personality type they call 'orchid' would die when not treated appropriately, but when in 'optimal' circumstances, would blossom spectacularly.

What I find special about this article is that there are no value judgements about parents, and there are no excuses for children. Stretching the 'orchid' metaphor, they are not only found in hot-houses. So, the circumstances for the 'orchid' child to develop completely could be completely naturally occurring. I just read 'The Last Lecture' by Randy Pausch (after having seen it on YouTube a few times), and one of the points he made is that he 'lucked out on the Parent Lottery'. I've also recently read 'Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman' which is an eclectic collection of life incidents, but what stood out for me, is that his parents were completely supportive of his experiments and curiousity. It was dangerous on occasion, but he survived, their house survived, and he went on to be very useful.

I'm contemplating becoming a parent and (as I've stated before) I think I'll be ok at it. What I'm learning though, is that we need to be sensitive to the individual child as well. I have 'principles of child rearing' that I occasionally discuss with OA and we tend to agree, but where we sometimes disagree is how much to 'curtail' a child. Especially with little boys, sometimes they're not very careful. They hurt themselves, they break stuff and such-like. This is not true of all boys, but assuming we have a child like this, is the right answer that we restrict their curiousity and movement to ensure minimum damage to themselves and property? Say we think the right approach is to scare the child into immobility, how would that help? It might ensure the child lives to adult-hood, but with a significant amount of fear. Is there a middle-path? Where we're able to evaluate risk in a split second, and allow some activities, but disallow others? Will a small child be able to evaluate these or understand the difference (i.e. using an electrical device v. putting nail into electricity socket)?

And moving along to the other issue that I wanted to write about. Now that I've read the article, I think my brother is an 'orchid'. There are some 'optimal' settings for him, which he may not have had for most of his life. Now he's an adult, and it seems sometimes like he's not able to get beyond this, probably for the same 'orchid' related issues. If this is true, I'd also like to know if professional help would work, I'd really like him to get it if it works.

Professionalism

I think I blogged about this once before, years ago. A senior colleague was telling his super-boss, that someone who had left our organization, was being a thorn in the side of some senior executive. The senior executive was passing the pain along to this senior colleague. The super-boss said, 'don't fight with a pig, you'll both get dirty and the pig will enjoy it' and then said 'that was advice'. Very good advice I thought.

Through my working life, I've not encouraged gossip. For whatever reason, nobody tells me anything. I have friends in the office, people I hang out with during the work day, but not a single one tells me that 'x' is seeing 'y' or that someone said something about me or somebody else, etc. Ever. In about 9 years of working, that's pretty odd wouldn't you say? I wondered whether to feel left out. Now... I think it's better.

A friend has joined the organization that I work at and has had a very different experience. Given, she's a part of a team and I'm an individual contributor, but I'm still amazed at the situation she finds herself in in 4 months. She's so pissed off with one of her colleagues, that she's willing to tell anybody who'll listen, even people who are in the same team. Naturally they reciprocate very willingly, leading to this wonderfully unhealthy working situation. Sure, it's hard to work with a colleague who seems out to get you, but what's the solution? It's gotten to a stage where this other girl who has the same boss as me, asked me today to do something about it (tell our boss basically).

Instead I called my friend who vented majorly. Sure, there may be things that are upsetting, the other person's behaviour may not be appropriate, but surely there's a 'mature' way to handle this? Not bitching behind her back, even if she does the same? Not complaining about how she doesn't know how to act etc.? Sure, the other woman may be a perfect bitch herself, but we're back to the 'pig' story aren't we?

I think whatever else I may be, I maintain my equanimity. I may not want to, but I'll be damned if someone makes me lose my self control, in a professional interaction. I just thought about it some more, and I've had remarkably agressive interactions, I've been troubled, I've had my credibility questioned etc., but I managed to get through, get the job done and let that speak for me. I'm not perfect, but I'll ensure that people mainly say that I'm 'professional'. Something that my friend has not managed to do.

I'm trying to understand why I felt the urge to write this down, probably because she's my friend, and that had something to do with her getting the job. And now I've another friend considering whether she should join. The key difference between these two? The one who's only considering worked for a long time at a competitive office, where she had to deal with this kind of stuff regularly, and clearly managed. She has another minor advantage though, the woman who's causing the first friend trouble is changing roles, so should have very little left to do with this team at all.

The saddest thing? I have a great professional relationship with the 'trouble-maker'. I think she's smart and sensible. She's had bad luck with team members in the past, maybe that bad-luck is continuing, maybe she's finally met someone who's as competent as her, maybe she's insecure, I'm not sure what it is, but I am sure that it could have all been handled differently.

Random Voyeurism

I used to read this blog earlier, written by a girl who was in love with a neighbour, who broke up with her. One day she protected her blog, and then deleted it. I found today that she'd started another one. So I've spent some hours today reading the new one. She's still as depressed (about 1.5 years after breaking up) but maybe things are looking up in her life. This post is not about that though.

It's about how I think marrying one person when you're still in love with another is the worst thing you could do to your spouse. I know that several people have done it, some have resulted in happy marriages even, but only due to the great strength of the spouse. I personally believe that for a person going into a marriage, expecting a loving spouse, the worst thing you can find is a kind stranger whose thoughts and heart belong to another. Worse, because they agreed to marry you (and they're honest about the choice they made), they try really hard to be good to you but their heart isn't in it. And you try to be a good spouse, you appreciate their contributions, you want to hold hands while walking and they flinch. You try to hug them impulsively and they freeze. Imagine that? Imagine not knowing why the person you're now ready to build your future with is only polite with you. Not being able to understand why they look troubled or sad and when you ask them, they snap or avoid or worse, tell you that they didn't want to get married to you in the first place.

And now imagine the reverse. You're in love with one person but have agreed to marry another. You're expected to have a 'wedding night' and be affectionate with a person you barely know when all you want to do is to be with someone else. Or even to take some time to get over someone else, and be free to fall in love with your spouse, but you don't have that time. You're already in a relationship in which you have multiple duties.

A totally toxic situation, but much more cruel to the one who wasn't expecting it.

Another part of the 'random voyeurism' is that the girl with the blog comments that her friend walked in on her father kissing the cook, 2 years after the friend's mother had died. The situation is not what intrigued me. The kissing is what did. I'm more than willing to admit that for Indian men, the help is the first line of attack. What I found surprising in that story is that the pair were kissing. An activity that I only associate with affection. Much like holding hands. Not like sex or groping, for both of which the other person could be irrelevant, as long as they are of the right sexual pursuasion.

I have also come to the conclusion that this is just me. I watched a movie yesterday - a French film named the Bay of Angels about a man and a gambler. The man learns how to gamble and along the way meets this woman who is a gambler. She seems to be using him, but I could never be sure that that was it. And he seemed besotted enough to be used and not want to let her go. He could see that at times she only wanted his money, not his affection and it hurt him, but he was willing to continue. And I couldn't understand it.

For all my willingness and self-proclaimed ability to see multiple sides of an argument, I'm unable to believe that men feel as strongly as women. Most definitely because I am not a man and have had my fair share of heartache from men. Maybe it's the indepth socializing that men go through that I'm not able to pierce the veil of it and see their true feelings or appreciate that they feel pain as well. Maybe it's that I've not understood many men. The men I've had the opportunity of interacting with (father, brother, husband) have all been reserved. Maybe now I'll get to know more of the sensitive ones. The ones who talk openly about what they think and feel. Maybe they'll get hurt, but hopefully not. And hopefully I'll be privileged enough to see some thinking and feeling.