Ten pounds of personality in a five-pound bag
This post is about the Israel/Hamas war.
This post by Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg is extremely powerful. Read the full thing before making comment.
https://www.lifeisasacredtext.com/on-hostages-and-broken-hearts/
And try not to have a scarcity mindset around empathy.
I have SO MANY FEELINGS about this.
https://rojospinks.substack.com/p/the-friendship-problem
And so people have easily 1000 virtual friends, but no one they can ask to feed their cat.
I HAVE BOTH AND IT’S MAGICAL.
“place-based friendships” – this sounds like Third Places but also, yeah, friendship is what happens when you Show Up.
People outside the constraints of modern western capitalism
Call a spade a spade. This is the knowledge economy. This (moving away from your support system) is how the knowledge economy WORKS. It’s not capitalism that’s the problem; it’s a world where you move to where the jobs are, rather than working whatever job and staying in your home town forever.
But, with remote work…maybe it doesn’t need to? IDK.
But the alternative is we all work at the one textile mill in town. Either you move to where the opportunities are, or you stick to the opportunities available in the town where you were born.
Would I still be happy, if I were a schoolteacher and attended the local Methodist Church every Sunday? Quite possibly. Or I could be clawing down the yellow wallpaper.
The best thing you can do to prepare yourself for climate change is live in an area with a high degree of social trust.
YES THIS OMG.
This is what I tell people who are like “I need to move to get away from climate change” – babe, you already live in the Piedmont, and the best prep is knowing and trusting your neighbors.
And this comment on the original post is what I am talking about when I get tetchy about Stardew Valley working out in real life:
Living now in a small farming town in New England after being a global nomad all my life, I realize that lots of Americans have had that stable interconnectedness of community that I never experienced in cities and suburbs. Town government, church, volunteer Fire & Rescue, annual festivals etc all require hours of interaction with fellow townsfolk. A barn fire or loose animal rallies neighbors’ help and covered dishes are brought to the sick or grieving. Problem is, not many people under 70 are carrying on any of this. The younger generations have moved out or do not participate. It took a few years but now I know that behind the Norman Rockwell scenes, a lot of these folks despise each other. They smooth things over and show up to the raffle or the funeral anyway because of a sense of duty and fear of social censure, sentiments lost in more individualistic, anonymous cities and suburbs. I admit to plunging in as a newcomer only to find that the busybodies who run everything want my labor, but have their own friend and family circles and are not open to outsiders for close friendships. They bonded long ago over babies and can’t understand my life. Conformity seems to be the entry fee for most communities, always a challenge for free thinkers. No tidy lesson I’m afraid, just another perspective on the struggle for connection in our atomized times. Thanks for your thought provoking piece!
“Conformity seems to be the entry fee for most communities.” Yws. Consider the etymological roots of those words: both “conformity” and “community” carry an original meaning/connotation of “togetherness.”
It’s important to allow for non-conformity in general; being able to express yourself is an important part of self-actualization. But bear in mind that that’s just the tip of Maslow’s pyramid; if you don’t have the base layers, nothing else will matter because you’ll be dead. This isn’t intended to excuse communities that exile people over stupid stuff; but I think it does, at least, explain the emphasis on conformity for a lot of communities.
Anyway. Go read the other post. It’s good.
My friend sent me this essay today, and it’s very good.
https://www.liberalcurrents.com/the-crisis-of-gender-relations/
What this has meant for women is a society in which they have options outside the patriarchal bargain. Simply working for a wage is enough to provide the security that once husbands exclusively controlled. Or, to put it more intuitively: the rise of two-income households isn’t a result of economic hardship. It’s a result of economic growth.
Go read it.
A variety of painful circumstances in my life recently have crystallized out a thought, for me: as much as we want a Group to be a cohesive unit, the group is only as strong as the strength of its various dyadic friendships.
When a group that had been constructed around one central Hub Person implodes, the continuance of the group is dependent on whether any of the Spoke People had actually formed individual (“dyadic”) friendships with each other. Without those interconnected friendships, the group would wither away without its Hub. (And maybe that’s why some Hubs feel threatened when they’re no longer the gatekeepers of access to the other friends?)
And when a large enough group (40 or so people) forms, not everyone will be as close to everyone else in that group; so it’s up to the individuals to build (or not build) their friendships with one another. If one person is having a crisis and reaches out, I am finding that sometimes, a larger group is *less* likely to respond. It’s the small six person chats that get things done for each other; or it’s an existing dyadic friendship within the larger circle that recognizes the need and answers it.
Is this the Bystander Effect in action? Are the larger groups prone to feeling too helpless to help? Someone else will do it?
Is this an effect of geography? Some of my Discords are pretty geographically dispersed, and I think that makes it harder (though not impossible) to build those sturdier connections.
It can also be hard to know what/how someone needs help. With closer individual bonds, there’s more of a chance that the person helping will actually help, versus accidentally making things worse. (I know that’s a thing for me as well: I’ve made things worse so often.)
But I just had an absolutely terrible week, and all kinds of people came to my rescue; and I am so grateful. And I witnessed someone else leave a group because they weren’t getting the support they needed, and my heart aches for them; but we were never directly close with each other, either, so I felt too distant (geographically and emotionally) to help. So it goes.
But anyway, my point in all this rambling is: If you are in a large friend group, make sure you aren’t neglecting the individual connections with individual people. In the end, “The Group” is a legal fiction. The people that help you move are the real individual humans that you can bond with, or not, as life takes you.
But try to take care of each other. Yes, The Village is built on unpaid labor. It’s transactional even though it’s not tracked, or shouldn’t be tracked, because Village Support is about having help with specific concrete actions that need doing.
I don’t know. I’m rambling and tired. But just. Look for the helpers; and be the helpers, when you can.
A couple things today.
First is this Instagram video of the song “Keep Marching.” Even if the work is not completed during your lifetime, keep fighting for everyone’s rights.
Second is this essay someone sent me called Cathedral Thinking. It’s about the same sort of thing: that we have to think bigger than just the span of our own lives.
https://www.mr-sustainability.com/stories/2021/cathedral-thinking
Third is this quote that gets cited in the first item here, but it’s worth revisiting:
The Talmud states, “Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Fourth and finally is the song “Hope Eyrie.” Even though space flight is not much in vogue in my circles right now, I find this a powerful reminder of what humans CAN accomplish if we work together. Even if we don’t have the resources to do this specific thing right now, we can still do great things, together.
Hang in there, everyone.
I recently took a weeklong hiatus from Facebook – not on purpose, just because I was very busy with things going on in my life, and didn’t have time to log in and share some memes.
While I was gone, a very anodyne post that I shared exploded. I was generally aware that “there was some drama,” but I was unaware of the fact that people were, apparently, calling out to me within the comments of the post. (I do not keep Facebook on my phone for balance/mental health reasons. Life/life balance? It’s not work/life balance, it’s just that I find Facebook distracting, and I try to limit my distractions whenever possible.)
Today I’m checking back in on things, and reflecting: should I have been there to monitor the post?
I have a friend who considers his online space (that he controls and moderates) to be an extension of his living room: that it is for people who he invites in, of his own volition, and he expects them to behave as though they *are* in his living room, conversing with people they know to be his personal friends, with all the assumption of noble intent that would go along with such an interaction.
Not all of us keep such a tight leash on our Internet communities. My Facebook is almost entirely private, and while I do occasionally befriend people who are “one hop” away from me (and have made good friends by doing so), in general, I try to keep the posts to people I do, in fact, know, and generally get along with.
This has landed me in hot water more times than I can count; in part, because I can get along with many different types of people. Not everyone; I have my lines. I have unfriended or blocked a handful of folks over the years, and I could probably tell you exactly why for each one. (If I knew how to do spoilers on WordPress, I would give the examples right here.)
This is, in a sense, an extension of Geek Social Fallacy #4: Friendship Is Transitive. The people that I am friends with are not always going to get along with one another; and that goes double if I am not there to moderate the tension. But here’s the thing: I don’t live on Facebook. Facebook is not real life. I cannot moderate it all the time; I’m not hosting a 24/7 living room party in my house. And I think that fact extends to situations in which I refrain from logging in, even for extended periods. My real life will always take precedence over Facebook. (Even if real life does involve some level of farting around on my phone on DIFFERENT social networks.)
So, while I do feel bad that the conversation spiraled without me…I am realizing that I don’t feel responsible for it, if that makes sense. I would say “sorry,” but it would be the “sorry” of Condolence, not of Apology.
I figure I will continue on as I have begun: by using Facebook sporadically, and not trying to check it more often just because people might have driven a thread off a cliff. (Especially since on a platform like Facebook, I have no moderation power beyond just deleting the entire thing.)
One of my vices is that I love to read advice columns on the internet. I looooove the train wreck of watching other people implode.
But to expand on the Advice Column Paradox a little bit: I think that part of why I’m usually in the “maybe you should just break up” camp is because I view dating as a way to determine if you are compatible with the other person for the long term.
If you are not compatible: that’s completely okay! It’s okay to date someone for one, two, five, whatever years and then realize that you want completely different things out of life and relationships. Now, is it better to realize that earlier than later? Of course. But if you’ve realized a fundamental incompatibility in the relationship… You don’t “owe it to” the relationship to try to force it to work.
AND THEN you get things like this TikTok, where we have the algorithm trying to convince us that we are Better Off Alone (at home, engaging with a platform). For my part, no, I don’t think “he wants to meet in a public place” is a problem. I think it’s the greenest of green flags.
But overall? It’s okay to have dealbreakers. It’s okay to walk away from a relationship that’s not working. “The relationship” isn’t an entity that deserves consideration; fuck off with that Citizens United nonsense. The relationship isn’t a person. You, and your partner, are the people here. Your respective best interests are what need to be considered.
And even if I think your dealbreakers are dumb? Frankly, my opinion doesn’t matter. I’m not the one in the relationship here. You are. And only you can determine if you’re happy, if you’re secure, if you’re satisfied.
So get out there. Own your preferences. See what makes you tick. And as Gazelle says, try everything. 😉
I’ve had best friends before.
One, or six, or fourteen at a time?
At this stage in my life, I think the whole concept of a best friend is children play-acting at monogamous marriage before they’re ready or interested in a romantic relationship with anyone.
I still remember the agonizing feelings I had when someone else got to be The Best Friend when I wanted to be.
And I remember the guilt I felt when I drifted apart from my closest friend of childhood. Was I, somehow, divorcing her?
I’ve had “friend breakup” talks, as an adult. They were painful, but a necessary part of being compassionate to someone you once (and still) care(d) about.
One of my friends in college told me, “Best Friends isn’t a single job; it’s a tier.” I didn’t believe her then. I do now. (And her husband is the person I’d pick if I was forced to pick a single best friend, which is an amusing bonus anecdote.) For the most part, I don’t have a single best friend; I have a rotating cast of friends who are all close to me in different ways. One friend is my local emergency contact for everything. The other (aforementioned) is my advance directive POA. Yet another pair are the designated guardians for my child in case both my ex husband and I pass away.
A friend today shared a post about how “best friend” is a term that imitates monogamy, and it made me think about all this. (I don’t have the link handy, but I’ll add it when I do.) It’s been percolating in my mind for a while, but I haven’t really put it into words.
It’s not realistic to expect one person to be all those friends for you; different people are different, and every dyadic friendship has its own shape. They don’t take away from each other, except inasmuch as time and energy are limited things.
I am grateful, though, for all the friends that I do have, and for all the friends I used to have. You have all touched, shaped, my life in one way or another.
I’m glad that I don’t have to pick one friend to be a Best Friend.
This tweet resonated pretty hard with me today.
https://twitter.com/sesmith/status/1622296174777729026?s=20&t=Qg-VB8q-Qoj–W1k8G-H0w
I hadn’t ever thought of it in these exact words, but this is basically how I frame my decisions about what to buy.
The phrasing I’ve used in the past is: Yes, I can afford this; but I shouldn’t afford it. (I think I may have heard my parents say that once but I’m not positive.) This attitude has served me well as I transition to a lower household income than what I had before: I’m putting off a lot of household furniture purchases and so forth, because I don’t want to find myself in a position where I am spending money on credit card interest. (That does not spark joy.) Some interest is unavoidable; emergencies happen, mistakes happen, etc. But anything I can do to minimize that helps me feel more comfortable and secure in my life now.
And the positive ethical implications of lower overall consumption are just the icing on the cake.
Emilybook 