Sunday, January 22, 2017

The Adventure Begins



"I feel like in an interview situation, it's a kind of intimacy that I can understand and handle- versus real life, where I'm much more of a bumbler and have a hard time" Ira Glass


That's me there, The Fabulous Lorraine. Mostly called Quiche. These days the simple, formal version is popping up more and more and I'm hearing "Lorraine" too. Which seems odd. But so does finding myself at Skool, as I like to call it. I thought I'd be a writer's assistant for the rest of my life, but life has a way of being surprising, hence the title: Adventures in Healthy Couple Relationships. 

It's not my first time blogging, and in fact, I'm laughing because in 2013 I stopped a blog I'd been doing since 2005, and people have been trying to get me to start it up again ever since. I've been declaring no, I write other things now, and anyway, Blogger is done. See how life surprises? 

A few things about this course had me a little worried. I'm not part of a "couple". I'm not in a "relationship". I'd be hard pressed to know how to even go about it, or to say if I'd rather be with a man or a women. Working for my writer was 24/7, for 20 years, and didn't leave a lot of time for anything else. Time got away from me a little. And new as this HDFS field is to me, I'm seeing, in every class, that one looks at oneself. I don't know how to be in love, or part of a couple, or intimate with another person.

I don't have that knowledge, caring, interdependence, mutuality, trust, and commitment going on with that one special person. And I'm not at all sure I ever have. This course, and looking at myself could be a huge can of worms. Or an Adventure.

I'm betting on Adventure. Hence my title. 

Our text suggests, in Chapter 1, page 4, paragraph 2 that "There is a human need to belong in close relationships, and if the need is not met, a variety of problems follows" I suspect the writer is correct. Mr. Miller also suggests being alone for long periods of time is very stressful. Again, possibly, though I'm not entirely sure. I've been alone now, here in my house, for four years, and I am not tired of it. Yet. Maybe curious about what having another person around would be like. I've got all these cats, but I think a person would be different. I mean, of course they would be, but would be gains be worth what you'd lose, is all I'm wondering. 

I wonder if there are different ways of getting that need to belong met? I always thought if you had something where you were committed, and caring that would be enough. Roller Derby was like that, a whole team of women who were like sisters. Some you liked, some you didn't, but they were all family. If you don't have a biological family, you create one from the people around you, to satisfy that need. But can you get along with out being part of a couple? Being on stage, playing music, is intimate. I've actually said that playing music for people was way cooler and closer and fun and yup, more intimate than sex could ever possibly be. (right so far) Writing is intimate. You and your readers here, getting close. I've lots of friends, and whenever I do feel the need to have someone around, they seem to be there. I adore them. I do spend time wondering though. And I wonder: What would it be like to fall in love and be with someone. And perhaps more importantly, how does a person go about doing it?

What was it Professor said in the first lecture? Epistemology, the study of knowledge, how we know what we know? And we're studying the Epistemology of Intimacy here? I like that. I know nothing about this, and I get to spend the next 8 weeks finding out. Which, to possibly state the obvious, could be rather helpful for me. I also like the bit in the lecture about being as embedded in relationships as fish are in water. Like it or not. 

And no, fish likely don't think about water swimming around, but it it's true. There they are.

















19 comments:

  1. Very interesting concept. I'm not sure about "needing" to be in a relationship though. I haven't been in one since I divorced my husband nearly 23 years ago. I spent several years "looking for love in all the wrong places" then just gave up. And I'm fine with that. I like that I answer to no one but myself, and at 51, I am so set in my ways I would be uncomfortable changing anything. Probably your Professor would have a heyday with that. :P

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think she would tear that idea apart. I quite like her and think she would understand. I should say too I would have not have kept this public if I thought she wouldn't get all of you, or us or this, if you see what I mean.

      I would have just done the assignment and moved on.

      There's something to be said for answering to no one but yourself too. I like it. I also like people. One of the thought I've had from time to time thinking about a partner is that being involved in a profession that kept them GONE half the time, touring, music, roadie, flying , driving or some such thing, would be awesome, you'd have reunions every few weeks or months and then they'd be off again.

      But remember this is only week 1, and there are 8.

      Delete
    2. One of my colleagues in Holland has a long term relationship with a partner who lives in the south of France. They don't see each other much but that seems to work well for them. Mind you they never wanted to raise a family together, which makes it easier.

      Delete
  2. I'm so happy that you're blogging again!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was forced, haha. I'm loving having all of you here tho for the discussion. It would be really weird to be writing to only my teacher, or blogging and knowing no one but the Professor would EVER comment or join in.

      Delete
  3. I'd opine that the decades you spent as a 24/7 writer's assistant could fulfill some of the definitional requirements of a relationship, partnership, intimate friend. Intimacy is more than just sex. In fact, sometimes sex can totally lack intimacy! I believe you'll find that you know a bleep of a lot more about relationships and couplehood and intimacy than you are able to give yourself credit for right now. This is going to be a fun adventure that you are inviting us along on.
    (Isn't Skool great?)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Truth! Intimacy IS about way more than sex, and there are many ways of being intimate. Neil and I certainly were, if by intimate you mean kind, caring, trusting, knowing each other and committed.

      HA! You may be correct, I might know more. I do need some help sorting it all out tho and THAT is why this course will be cool and why it's awesome to have y'all along here.

      Delete
    2. I get what you mean about having an intimate non-sexual relationship. I was thinking about it yesterday after I responded on here. My 24 yr old youngest son, who has been ill for the last 7 years, lives with me, so I'm not technically ALONE alone. We are close, so would I be as happy being alone and single without his companionship? Food for thought.

      Delete
  4. So glad to see you writing again!

    How does one go about falling in love and (or) being in a relationship? Just like anything in life: Things happen to you and you deal with them. You improvise. You get things wrong. You get some right. You learn. There is no cast in stone recipe. (Think how unpractical that would be).

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh, this is exactly the thing you need to have a good open think about all this stuff you don't know. I love that I can read your blog about it. I'll be interested in how they approach this Healthy Couple Relationships class in regards to concepts of monogamy as the title seems reductive to a enforced cultural normative pairing as opposed to all the happy alternatives also available to the open minded and free.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unless there is a Healthy Poly Relationships class too? Non-monogomous Relationships for the Joyful? Sign me up!

      Delete
    2. "enforced cultural normative pairing" -- I love how you brought that up, and in that specific language. My best friend of several decades' standing and I have had an ongoing dialogue for years about the social-acceptance elements of traditional cis couplehood and how those elements can be potential detrimental to those who find themselves in unhealthy relationships. She and I are both divorced, both relievedly so, and both very aware of a certain cultural imperative to be part of a couple. "You're nobody 'til somebody loves you" and all. Couple-hood can be lovely, and kudos to those who successfully attain and maintain that type of relationship, but what about those of us who don't WANT to be coupled? Where do we fit in this scenario? I'll be very interested in hearing about whether or not the course addresses the legitimacy of the choice to be single, and the viability of establishing intimacy under non-couple parameters. I'm also curious as to whether the course addresses the different types and levels of intimacy (including the non-sexual), and the fact that different people have differing ideas as to what actually constitutes an "intimate" relationship.

      Delete
    3. Seriously interesting idea here. It does assume "couple" as in two people. I like it that it hasn't assumed just man-women, but yes, there certainly are many other alternatives to one:one out there, and people happily engaged in them.

      Once we get away from the idea too that intimate=sex, it opens ever further. Which is a minor epiphany here on my first cup of coffee: Intimacy is not confined to traditional couple, or even non trad couples. Or need not be.

      Which begs the question I asked in the blog, do other things satidfy the need? Quite the exploration.

      Delete
  7. I too really embrace being single...I have a best friend I'm very close with and people I talk to every day, but honestly when I go home at night I'm happy to be sleeping alone. Please let us know where that ends up falling on the sliding scale of "normal". Then again I don't have cable tv or internet so I'm pretty weird anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think we should think of things in terms of "normal" and not normal. One thing I am sure of up front is there are many paths, and many ways of doing things. And finding what you need in life.

      That's saying "normal" when you mean "average" . We aren't weird. Ok, maybe we are, but you know what I mean. Weird isn't bad either, it's just different.

      Delete
  8. THIS is awesome, my dears. I'm thinking about ten things I wouldn't have thought of before reading your comments this morning. THANK YOU for reading, commenting and being here. Did I just say Thank You For Coming To Skool With Me??? I think i might have.


    There's a lot more to come.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Its so good to see you writing again, and I'm not going to comment further until I've had the time to mull over what you've written.

    ReplyDelete