Friday, October 8, 2021
I had a good night's sleep. Somewhere in the middle of the night, distressing thoughts entered my mind as I dozed. I just said, "Stop! Where there's undeniably a problem, this isn't helping." I had the thought of writing both voices in dialogue. Just thinking of doing that calmed me down. Doing it would slow me down. I would have time to think of a response before I delivered it. I can't do that when I'm just thinking of having an uncomfortable discussion.
I switched off my alarm. That bought me ten more minutes in bed. I was ready to jump up when I did because I had an important realization, clarity. I seek to understand the world and human relations through concepts. I know it doesn't do it for everyone, but some of my significant life changes have been motivated by a shift in understanding.
This one was triggered by something Shelly said last week. She said families are either rigid or enmeshed. Something about this has been nagging at me all week. I planned to ask Shelly to explain why her example of a situation she described would be considered an example of a rigid family structure. It didn't make sense to me. Her example was an incident shortly after she got married. She told her husband she would be out shopping for a few hours. When she returned five hours later, he had already contacted every hospital in the area. She said she came from a rigid family structure, and this behavior was an example of it. It didn't fit into my idea of rigid behavior. Among other problems with that term, enmeshed and rigid are not antonyms. (See Musings at the bottom of this entry for my thoughts on the subject.)
I had an appointment with Shelly today. Mostly I had good news. I was in a great mood. I had several breakthroughs. What helps me may not help anyone else; I respond to concepts. The first thought was I could write dialogues between me and people I find difficult to deal with. Of course, both sides would be coming from me, but that's what happens in my head anyway. The reality of what they may say may or may not be different from what I envision. I had situations when I explored reality, it wound up being worse than I could ever have imagined. Reality is not necessarily an improvement over imagination. The problem is not what they have to say; it is how I respond. I will be okay if I can get that under control, so I'm not reacting out of fear and pain. The second epiphany was about the structure of social relationships. I haven't had the chance to put this into action yet, but this could make a huge difference from what I've seen in the past. It already has as I understand how and why I didn't fit well in my family and why I did.
I used the 'Reacher' Dorothy had me buy a year ago for the first time today. Both my feet were giving me trouble. I could reach the right foot to place a toe separator between troubling toes, but I couldn't reach my left foot. My second toe was rubbing against my first, developing a blister. Instead of suffering, I finally decided to try the gadget. I was able to grab the pad in the pincher, but my toes were too close together to get the pad between. I found a long-handled hook in the kit. I wrapped the hook around my second toe a pulled it away from my first, creating space between the toes; then, I could place the pad where I needed it.
On my morning walk, I ran into Vince and Julie. They were using an alternate route, and I never walk on that street, but today Elsa wanted to check it out. I limited how far we walk on that street because a dog runs loose that viciously attacked other dogs. I have spoken to at least two people whose dogs had to be taken to the vet for repair. The dog's owner always apologized and paid for the vet bills but never put up a fence. I told Vince and Julie that I never walked that street because of that dog. Vince said, "Oh, you mean Kelly. She not here anymore." Ah, where did she go? He made a face indicating she's bought the farm. Nice to know I can walk on that street without fear for Elsa's well-being.
Paulette finally dropped off her cardboard load for me to take to the recycling center. I saw their container loaded with cardboard for the trash company pick-up. Our trash company does not recycle. The only thing we can recycle in Hawaii now is cardboard and glass. That's it, folks. No paper and no plastic. We used to send our stuff to China. That deal has fallen through. I hope the mainland is doing better than we are.
I headed out to do chores. First top Safeway for a birthday card for Yvette, who will be 52, earplugs so I can go to My Bar for her celebration without worrying about the hearing I have left, vinegar, and Hersey's milk chocolate kisses with whole almonds. I got a large vinegar, a birthday card that caught my eye for a two-year-old, and four -10 oz bags of kisses. There were at least three more I left for some other hungry customer. I didn't want to take all of them and leave someone else disappointed. Their pharmacy section was minimal; there were no earplugs. I stopped at Long's. They had earplugs, and I bought two more 10 oz. bags of kisses. I mapped out my course for maximum efficiency. My next stop was UPS, where I dropped off the Styrofoam I pulled out of Judy's garbage. After that, I went to the transfer station to drop off my cardboard stash along with Judy and Paulette's.
My last stop was at Farm and Garden. I bought a hibiscus from Margo to replace an old one that didn't have the immune to resist parastates. It's a gorgeous multicolored bloom. I haven't seen another bloom since I planted it. I could see it was loaded with buds, but they just fell off when they were ready to open. I sent a picture to Margo. She suggested Bayers rose and flower care.
Most Farm and Garden employees are rough-looking men, not tough, just not devoted to appearance. However, there is a woman there who was groomed to the nines. Her clothes are aloha casual, but she is fully made-up, with carefully selected clothes and tasteful jewelry. She is also knock out competent. She knows the business inside out. Did I want Bayer's in powder form or liquid? I asked the difference. The powdered form had to be mixed with water and then applied. Liquid, please. Then I headed home.
____-____-_____
MUSINGS:
The antonym for rigid is loose; the antonym for enmeshed is isolated/contained or insular. In a rigid family structure, behavior is dictated by rules; in a loose family structure, behavior is arrived at through negotiation. Possibilities are on a continuum. A functional family may be on one end of the spectrum versus another, but any family at the extreme pole must be dysfunctional- at least in today's world.
In a self-contained family structure, everyone does their own thing without needing to consult or even inform other family members. In an enmeshed family structure, things are decided jointly. Again, either in an extreme form is dysfunctional.
I have trouble imagining how interpersonal relationships worked on the savanna when survival was the focus. Were all relationships rigidly defined with minimal enmeshment? Did someone only function in a role as a wife, a husband, a fellow hunter/fighter, a fellow cook, etc.? One can determine the nature of interpersonal relationships by measuring specific linguistics cues- up to a point.
In a rigid/ isolated structure, the words they, them, their, theirs, he, she, and it will predominate. In a loose/enmeshed family structure the words I, me, my, mine, you, your, and yours will be prominent. There is some agreement on how much of any of these words are appropriate in a healthy situation. In a healthy environment, I assume the rate of use of all the above words hovers somewhere around the middle between the two extreme points.
Another distinguishing characteristic between the two extremes is scripted versus improvised conversation. The rigid person relies on a script. The loose person wants everything to be improvised. A good actor strikes a balance; that's also the case with a good conversationalist.
The rigid person insists there is "a right" way that everyone agrees upon, and they know what it is. That totally freaks me out. All I have to stand on is my own platform. Anything I think or believe is completely my responsibility. Even if I follow someone else's created order, I am completely responsible for the position I adopt. I can't point to anyone else. It's a scary place to be. I don't believe there is a single 'right way to do most things in today's culture. Our culture is no longer monolithic. We are poly on top of poly- with an extra dose of poly- on top of that. You have to be flexible.
Here's an irony: at both the extreme points, the words I and you are confused. I equals you, and you equals I. It's easy to understand how I and you can be confused on the enmeshed side of the coin.
A healthy version of that confusion is between mother in infant child. They should be enmeshed. What's good for that baby is good for that mother, both from the mother's and from the baby's point of view. However, the job of the parent is to separate from the child as they grow. Just because the parent wants something for their child does not necessarily mean it's what they want or is good for them- regardless of how much the parent is willing to 'sacrifice' to make it happen. Every parent needs to care for their child because of 'their' ( the parent's_) need. Fortunately, in most cases, the child benefits, but that is not always the case. When you have adults who cannot discern what they want, how they want the world organized, versus what is actually good for someone else or what the other truly wants, then you start sinking into dysfunction.
I think an isolated interpersonal relationship style demands a greater degree of rigid social order. Isolation means less discussion and negotiation. If there is going to be any stability, it will have to be a set of rules. Problem: everyone comes in with their own set of rules. In the bad old days, the man had the 'authority to set the rules. In the best-case scenario, the man and the woman each had their own domains of control. Dad's rules were followed in this domain, and mom's in that.
In the isolated relationship structure, the words I, me, my, mine, you, your, and yours are used less frequently. Here's an irony: in an extreme example, that leads to enmeshment too. S.N. Goenka told this story about extreme denial of the 'I.' He was touring India. He was a known, respected leader of the Vipassana mediation. In one town, a fellow religious leader came to him for an interview. The conversation went like this: Goenka, "'Your' temple is having a big problem. The town leaders won't allow 'your' elephant to live in 'your' temple." Goenka had no temple and certainly no elephant. The religious leader belonged to a sect that forbade using the words I, me, my, or mine. This was done in an attempt to 'eradicate' ego. Good luck! (The goal should be a healthy one instead of an unhealthy one.) This poor fellow was forced into enmeshment because of his denial of the "I.'
To most of you, this will be merely abstract thinking. To me, this is an epiphany. It is a lens through which to look at many relationships in my life. I think my family leaned toward rigid/isolated. The one exception to that was my relationship with my father. He played Freud to my Anna. I, me, my, mine were essential concepts. How else do you do psychoanalysis? I was taught and rewarded for thinking that way. Then I had to deal with my mother, who had no idea what planet I came from. Poor woman! I assume my dad had no insight into the situation either. My dad was also excellent at talking about they, them, their and most particularly it. He ran our mealtime conversation like college courses on religion, philosophy, ethics, mythology, etc. I did well with that too.
Thank God I met Mike. He was looking for a 'worthy opponent." He saw me like that. Someone who could be his equal in a relationship. He also saw me as just as concerned with the you, your, and yours as I was with I, me, my, and mine. He frequently confirmed that he never changed his mind about that latter. I'm obviously not seen that way by people who find the first and second-person pronouns as a seasoning for conversational exchanges and never as the main meal.
No comments:
Post a Comment