Search This Blog

Showing posts with label article. Show all posts
Showing posts with label article. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Legally Married... and Dating with Permission




I’ve heard some pretty interesting stories of ex-spouses over the years. People who were divorced yet would still share a bed with their (mutual) children also living in the house. Couples who split legally yet would still date and even sleep together. Personally, I thought the point of divorce was to divorce yourself from your partner, but maybe I’ve been mislead all this time.

Then there are the stories of those not actually divorced (in fact, they’re still married) yet one or both of the partners has another significant other on the side. Whoa, confusing even in writing it, no? One example in particular pops into my mind. I know of a couple who have been married for years and years. Their lengthy marriage, though, didn’t stop a third character from entering their relationship. The husband has had a longtime girlfriend, but in no way has that caused his wife to end things with him.

In fact, what has happened since the introduction of this second woman is completely counter intuitive. You’d think the wife would be horrified, right? That she’d obviously leave her husband immediately? Nope, not at all. I know you won’t believe it when I say it, but now the couple has turned into a threesome-- although I don’t mean that in the sexual way. Perhaps I really should mean in that way, but I don’t know the details in that department.

What I do know, though, is that the three are often spotted out to dinner together and sometimes show up at parties as a group. I don’t know the specifics of their arrangement and I certainly have no idea how a wife is comfortable with sharing her husband with another lady. But maybe that’s not important. If it works for them, who am I to judge?

So for the entire time that I’ve know about this situation, I had foolishly assumed that it was unique. Who would have known, though, that these people were, in essence, a product of their time, foreshadowing an up and coming trend in America?

This week, The New York Times’s Pamela Paul just published a story called The Un-Divorced. (See http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/fashion/01Undivorced.html). I quote the following paragraph regarding Warrn Buffet from her article-- a statement that seems to parallel the previously described scenario:

Mr. Buffett separated from his wife, Susan, in 1977 but remained married to her until her death in 2004. All the while, he lived with Astrid Menks; they married in 2006. The threesome remained close, even sending out holiday cards signed, “Warren, Susan and Astrid.”

Um... right. A holiday card from the three of them. That’s just as normal as if they were to birth a child with genes from all three of them.

Here’s another interesting one:

Jann and Jane Wenner separated in 1995 after 28 years but are still married, despite Mr. Wenner’s romantic relationship with a man.

It’s interesting to note that Wenner not only has three sons with his wife, but also another three children with his partner. Again, another situation that, at least to me, is so difficult to comprehend and rationalize that it’s difficult to type.

Now, I, for one, certainly would want to remain married and committed (legally at least) to a man who was romantically involved with another man. There’s nothing I’d want more, in fact, than to share the man I’ve committed myself to with another person. But that’s just me.

Anyway, it’s important to read the entire article to get a full picture of this current sociological trend. What I think the article provides us with, though, is an interesting commentary on the current state of living in the US.

How pathetic is it, for example, that people have to stay married just so that they can share health insurance? Or what about the fact that the legalities of divorce can be so difficult to navigate that people would rather remain components of an unhappy marriage than to deal with the obstacles of the system?

At the end of the piece, the author makes the point that “not being divorced is also an excuse not to marry.”

Touché.

Would you really have the energy in you to remarry if you had just spent decades sharing your “soulmate” with another person? At that point, I’d rather just be alone-- without any cats, thank you very much-- than to deal with marriage ever again.

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

A Commentary on Our Generation






It's true: my job isn't very intellectually stimulating. Sure, I have days where I'm crazed, days where I don't know which task to tackle first. All in all, though, as my friends so lovingly joke, I'm someone's "bitch." (Sorry to all you feminists out there, but it's true.) I support someone else, an MD who runs research labs that have discovered countless genes-- discoveries that have already saved some labs and will hopefully save many more in the future. Did I go to a highly-recognized school to support another person? No. Did my family have to shell out well over $200,000 just so that I could earn my meager salary that pays the rent but doesn't allow for a ton of disposable income? Nope, definitely not.

That said, I'm happy. Really, I am. OK, I know that doesn't sound convincing, but you just have to take my word for it. On a miserably humid day like today, I'm thankful that I don't believe in that I'm not drenched in sweat chasing four year olds through a sprinkler at camp like I used to back in the day. (I'm more grateful that I'm not cleaning up after their accidents post-sprinkler on any day.) In fact, I'm sitting here with a smile on my face (on the inside at least) because I'm covered in goosebumps from the chill of my office's air conditioning. And on days like this, believe me, it feels amazing to be inside a freezing high-rise in my jail-like cubicle; my small salary feels worthwhile. Plus, I work for a great company and with and for great people, so really, who am I to complain?

Overall, though, I am grateful. My job can feel "below me" at times and it for sure isn't comfortable getting myself out of bed and into the unpleasant weather, only to sit at my desk to schedule someone else's appointments and apply for his multi-million dollar grants. But each and every time that I feel like this flat out sucks (aint no classier way to say it, honestly) I remind myself-- thankfully I'm not at home. I also try to remind myself that maybe in some indirect way I'm helping others-- if I schedule my boss's time to take a breath or eat a bite of sandwich, I'm helping to manage his time so he can save lives.

Now, please understand, I'm not knocking any of my friends who are at home and living with their parents. I understand that people have loans to pay and that many people can't get jobs during these unfortunate times. I mean, according to the most recent estimates, almost 10% of the American population can't get a job. That's nothing to laugh at. As they say, tough times call for tough measures, and those measures might include moving back into a childhood home with a mom and dad who insist on attaching a GPS armband to their kid to monitor their whereabouts at all times.

What I don't respect, though, are the people who could find themselves financially capable of moving out and being on their own, but are unwilling to take any job that they consider to be in that "below them" range. I have plenty of friends like that-- friends who won't take a job that pays a decent salary because they don't immediately sense any upward mobility coming from that position.

As I rode the subway this morning-- my ultimate destination after Starbucks being this cubicle, of course-- I skimmed The New York Times as I always do. Now I wasn't actively thinking about this whole having a job vs. not having a job concept, but I think it's always in the back of my mind during my commutes. Anyway, one of the top ten articles, American Dream Is Elusive for New Generation: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/business/economy/07generation.html?_r=1&hp. The article essentially profiles a guy who's a couple of years older than me who sits home unemployed day after day. He turned down a job that offered him a $40,000 salary, feeling it would fail to lead him in a worthwhile direction and that the pay was too low. Meanwhile, his parents support him: they pay his rent, his cellphone bills and allow him send out only four or five resumes per week. (They're, of course, not enablers or anything.)

Let me tell you that when I was looking for work, I sent in close to fifty resumes per day. I did anything that I could to land a job. When I was looking to switch from one job that was too unbearable to the next, I was even willing to take a pay cut. A pay cut! Anything to maintain my independence. I would have rather sat and answered phones all day (with memories of my undergraduate career lurking in the background) just to be able to pay my own way. No job, I realized, is below me, and it shames me to think that so many of my peers are willing to mooch off their parents-- the same parents who have already supported them for well over twenty years-- just because they don't want to do something that, to them, feels degrading.

I don't know much about the business world, but I do know this: it looks much better to be doing a job like mine than to be sitting home and watching TV all day. No employer wants to know that a candidate spent the past sixteen months watching Hoarders and The Bachelor on DVR and Seinfeld on syndication. Getting up and going to work every day-- whether it's working construction or as an investment banker or scrubbing filthy toilets-- is a much more valuable use of your time.

So, to the people of my generation, I have to say that I almost plead with you: get up and do something. Prove your intelligence and your good work ethic, and that The New York Times has been portraying us incorrectly. And for the love of God, drop that Chipotle burrito, get off your parents' couch, erase that higher-than-though attitude from your mind, and work hard like the rest of us. Our grandparents, great-grandparents, even our parents did it, and there's no reason we shouldn't.


XOXO,
R.

PS: For more on how others perceive members of our generation, please see this article from a May edition of the New York Times Magazine: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/magazine/30fob-wwln-t.html. Again, another reason to prove everyone wrong.