it is perhaps telling that in the most coherent and professionally-published piece on singlism i could find (through an admittedly quick google search), there is no concrete example, ever, of how people have been, or will in the future be discriminated against by the fact of their being single. there's a lot of mumbo-jumbo about how people who are single are frowned upon in the workplace and in life because being single isn't "normal" or whatever, but beyond that i see no reason in any of the reason i've done thus far for organized, militant action on behalf of singles whose lives are judged so pointless in our relationship-obsessed culture that that culture goes out of its way to enact its bias against singles in real-world ways like paying them less (as women are paid less, on average than men) or giving their children lower-quality education (as is generally the case for minority children when compared to whites).
and there's where my first problem arises. it's a purely rhetorical one, to be sure, but i'm still angry and want to rip the heads off of teddy bears: the idea that somehow singlism is on par in severity or in the necessity for social awareness with racism, sexism, or classism is just absolutely ridiculous and is a testament to how transparent those first three things are to most white, upper-middle class americans (generally the people agitating against singlism). is there a set of culturally-reinforced assumptions made on behalf of single people by not-single people? yes, of course. is the practice of group A making up a set of then-culturally-reinforced assumptions about group B based on perceived difference as a way of group A self-reinforcing their already-assumed superiority a practice that's been going on for at least thousands of years, partially as a method of defining community? yes, of course. people in relationships are going to insist that being in a relationship is the norm, the same way that men who get to have better jobs over women are going to insist that it's just normal because to argue otherwise might be to put their own jobs in jeopardy.
i'm not completely insensitive to the singlist plea. i've got a good amount of experience being single myself. now you're thinking: "wow, the dude who insists on hard evidence from the internet is going to prove his point using personal anecdotes?" yes. shut up.
there was a period not long ago at all where i was single for about three years. going into said period, i was pretty aware that it was likely to be a long single period (i.e. i wasn't really interested in dating, didn't think i would be for awhile, and didn't know of anyone that was beating my door down to get a ride in my motor-carriage). as such, i tried to approach it constructively. unlike, say, the last time i was single for an extended period of time, coming out of a long high school relationship that i, in my AWESOME high school naivety (is that a word?) thought was going to last forever. the result was a decent near-year's worth of sullen depression until (of course, you guessed it) i met someone else and got to scurry back to the haven to dated-dom rather than deal with my issues.
anyway, the time was i was most recently single was rough, in a lot of ways. especially the second year or so, which coincided with the time in which most of my friends moved from pullman and i, too socially awkward to really make any new friends, basically spent an entire year or so in my apartment watching movies and playing madden 2003. eventually, though, i decided that four virtual super bowl rings were enough to secure my online legacy and i ventured back out into the world.
i guess my point is that i learned a lot through those years, both about making friends and about dating relationships. i learned a lot about how i had viewed friendships and relationships before and how detrimental my own selfish need for that kind of contact made it so difficult for me to initiate in the first place. interesting thought: if you don't desperately, creepily, intensely need every interaction you engage in to sustain your mental and spiritual health, those interactions get a lot easier, and more fun, and ultimately more fulfilling.
and i wouldn't have learned all that downward-facing-dog-bullshit had i remained in relationships. i had to hit what my old self regarded as the bottom to realize that that bottom was really just a different type of life. aside from the snarky label (which i'll get to in a minute), you could consider me a converted singlist. by the end of my three-year exile into singleland, i was absolutely happy and content to be alone romantically. which was about the time that i met someone and started a relationship that was functional and made me happier than i thought you were supposed to be in relationships (i don't think this was a coincidence). it's cliche (or, as spellcheck suggests, "cloche") to say that you have set the bird free and see if it comes back on it's own, but that's exactly what happened. the minute i stopped needing my life to be a certain way, the minute it became clear it was fine just the way it was.
so how does this tie back to singlism? IT DOESNT
"singlism" simultaneously expresses discontent and reinforces the idea that being in a relationship is a status symbol, neither of which actually helps anyone be any happier with their lot in life.
the first of my two complaints is pretty easy to grasp. if you feel the need to express loudly and clearly how perfectly okay you are with being single, to the point of discriminating and/or trash talking people who are in relationships...clearly you're not actually okay with being single. and this goes both ways, lest you think i'm choosing sides: if you really need to brag about how happy you and your SO are to everyone within hearing range, obviously things aren't going that well on some level.
the other complaint is a little more esoteric, but probably more important. i guess the best way to say it is that "singlism", by its very existence as a term and as a way of expressing difference between two perceived-different social groups, simplifies much of the reality of both being single and being in a relationship. it reinforces the idea that the main reason to be in a relationship is because you can be or because you should be - it doesn't matter if you're happy in the relationship, or who the other person is or what they're like or what they're name is...what matters is that you've got a date! on the other side, it casts not-dating as rebellion against the status symbol of dating. if you're not dating, it's not because you've got issues you're refusing to confront, or because maybe, simply, you just don't want to date. no, you're special because you're standing up to the institution! "singlism" just reinforces the idea that dating is the country club, and not-dating is wearing ripped-up jeans and ramones t-shirts...with the added "twist" of saying "hey, the ramones are fucking better than stupid golf anyway!"
if there turns out to be legitimate discrimination in any case (in a professional sense) because of someone's relationship status, then obviously that's bullshit and should be opposed. but i don't see any of that here. what i see is people who want to make a legitimate lifestyle choice a social statement. suddenly, dating or not dating is on the same level with whether you choose to wear a tie to work or a t-shirt, whether you wear dress shoes or converse all-stars. and that's not fair to the actual people you might actually be dating (or not dating), because the reality is that relationships are way more complicated than this stupid binary gives them credit for. it's like reducing politics to two parties just so that everyone has to pick a side. and we can all see how well that's working out...
but i suppose that's a rant for another late saturday night.
DUH-DUUUUUUUUUH!!!
1 comments:
need i say more... just give in and follow your instinct.
Post a Comment