Tuesday, 27 July 2010

Re: Relationship Ponderings

Taynement did a post called Relationship Ponderings, a really nice and well-received post. Only for yours truly to swagger his lazy backside and blurt out that he doesn't agree with what she said. And thought it would just pass like that. But no, Tay (bless her heart!) replied almost instanta (by email, no less!) and nicely asked me to explain... or else Blogville no go contain me and her! Lol.... ok, i admit i actually asked if she wanted me to explain, but i'd forgotten all about it. 

So this is me trying to connect my brain to my pen. Mind, its a loooooong post.

Ok, see, i actually agree that a good guy/girl is hard to find - very hard, if u ask me (sometimes i even wonder what exactly a "good" guy is). And yes, i also agree that relationships needn't be hard.
In fact, i basically agree most things Tay advocated (sorry Tay!!), except these:

1. "There no such thing as an emotionally unavailable man".
2. "... Most women, tend to take it personally and think something is wrong with them but nothing is wrong with you."

First, lemme modify #1 Disagreement to read "emotionally unavailable person", aah-ha (before them feminists go chop off my blokos, lol). Ok, so what is an "emotionally unavailable person"? Me, i've never heard the phrase before, but from Tay's description i'm assuming it means when your (supposed) sweet-heart isn't being open with you - is "blanking" you - is hiding what he/she is really thinking, etc. Now, the disagreement here is that Tay says its just cos you two don't "connect"; your "replacement" will prolly connect better and click, click! the locked gates swing open. Me, i say No can do. SOME people are JUST like that. I'm not saying this is always the case - in fact, most of the time, Tay's view is what actually obtains - the dude/dudette doesn't dig the Significant Other, so he/she blanks 'em. BUT every once in a while you come across people who are truly "solo" - could be something happened to 'em earlier in life, could also be they're just like that - but the thing is they just aren't that big in the communications department. Just so.

About #2, well, me i disagree cos its just not true (i mean it for both sexes). Don't get me wrong, i know some people have low esteem and tend to always blame themselves when things go wrong in their relationships; they need to be reassured that "there's nothing wrong with them"; now this i dig (even though this too isn't essentially true either; i mean, low self-esteem IS a problem, right?). But to integrate and sum up it up like that, including both the ridiculously meek-of-heart and the grotesquely pride-overblown, now that's where i have an issue. See, let's face up to facts a little. By definition human beings are imperfect, and its my personally opinion that most people are better at seeing other people's faults than seeing their's. There's nothing wrong with me. Really? Have you checked?

See, I've had my fair share of break-up's, and as self-righteous as it sounds, it's rarely my fault! (Yup, u heard me!) Here's what i usually tell myself when they happen: kay, it's not your fault that you're too proud; kay, you are a stuck-up idiot, but hey, what can u do? kay, u raised your voice way too loud, but it's not your fault that you can't control your temper... Ok, i'm exaggerating it, but the point i'm trying to make is we - most of us shaa, besides the ridiculously meek-of-heart, of course - we tend to play down our bad points, we can't understand how that "little" thing we said/did is making him/her so angry - why, if it was me i'd have forgiven him/her! Well guess what? It ain't you; its him/her! And he/she just doesn't like it!!! So why don't we shrug off our little cocoon of blamelessness a little and accept some responsibility. Nutty J said in one of her posts she fcuked up once; i respect that. At the start of the post, Tay said, "... appreciate him/her and don't sabotage yourself"; but how do we realize say we don sabotage the ting when we just keep thinking, "It's not my fault"? Go figure.

(mehn, this he/she/him/her gender thing messed up my argument small o)

Aah, well; there it is, what i disgree with. So much talk, Tay.

I guess in a nutshell i just have a problem with generalizations. :P

11 comments:

Myne Whitman said...

Like you, I also do not like generalisations but I don't remember that Taynement used that. She mostly used, most, and such words. But you're right in the failed relationships scenario. What matters at the end of the day though, after all the looking inwards, you don't change just because. You do so only if you see a NEED to and if not, you gats to be yourself.

Nutty J. said...

yup!! like i said somewhere (was it FB?)... people cannot be like us....only you can be like you,becos there is only one you in the world. So its our duty to tolerate and accept people the way they are. It is God's duty to change them. If you cant accept them like they are...do u both a favour and let 'em go.

Nice post Kay...

PS; why isnt there a spot to get feedback from comments?

kay9 said...

Aah, but Myne how do u KNOW if u need to change? Especially if your personal opinion is that u are 'ok'?

@Nutty: glad u liked it. No feedback button? Prolly Blogger misbehaving again, but i'll look into it... u know, like Batman does.

isha said...

Emotionally Unavailable: Me I have heard it before o. Someone said it to me when I stupidly professed my like for him. (His emotional unavailability did not stop him from flaunting his new woman tho). I think people are just emotionally unavailable to specific people sha. I don't agree with your idea that people who are generally solo should be allowed. I mean, why would I want to be with someone that I can't click with? He can have his mood swings with everyone else, but he'd better come to mama and be the most open person I know o...

It's not me, it's the other person: I think the koko of this situation is that we're to try to be more objective (dunno if that's the exact word I'm looking for) people. Even if you're not willing to speak about your own faults, in service to your ego, at least acknowledge that they're present with a 'Sorry for everything I might have done' kinda thing, and be better to the next person you'd date.

2cute4u said...

Took me sometime to be able to comment, bad network I suppose..
So what are you now huh?
A relationship shrink?

kay9 said...

@isha: i guess we can agree to disagree on the nitty-gritty of it. :)

@2cute: lol... naah, i don't do shrinks. Just a regular dude blogging his big mouth away, babe. Plus i had to give a reply to Miss Tay (abi na Mrs.?)

Nice Anon said...

5m longest time o! how body nau? Hmm high time you got married huh? I bet Z would love that o

ZeL said...

I too believe no one is emotionally unavailable. If someone is truly "solo" as you call it, how do they expect to find someone?

kay9 said...

@Ada-bekee: yeah, longest time my dear. Actually, umm, Z n i aren't together anymore, mostly my fault...

@Zel: not everyone finds 'someone', u know. Thanks for stopping by!

Nice Anon said...

Kom mechie gi onu! U better go and win her back! What is hell is wrong with you?

RepOne said...

U and Z did what??? *pulling kay's ear* what did you do nwoke....U wan chop cane?? better come and explain yaself osiso....

Post a Comment

holla back!