"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.
