Sunday, May 22, 2005

Escape From The Crab Nebula
Indifferent (More or Less), Part 1

Spikes and Barbs
Originally uploaded by LisaPal.
indifferent (adjective)- of no importance or value one way or the other; marked by a lack of interest, enthusiasm, or concern for something.
Of the seven variants, I chose the definition most appropriate for this evening.
I've been avoiding this subject for several months, but only because I didn't want to become the girl who cried wolf. I've made a few cryptic allusions to trouble in my relationship with Renard and I posted once about what looked like an impending break up that soon resolved itself. This scene has been repeated several times since then. Lately, things have become so tempestous and ill-defined that I've taken to calling the relationship The Crab Nebula. (Imagine how crabs behave around each other- that's us now.) But I think I've finally had enough of the spikes and barbs, the grayness and the ever-present eggshells strewn everywhere that I've had to so carefully navigate.

To wit: I have been very cautious and measured when I've presented the situation in my posts, just as I've had to be with almost every damned thing I've said and done in this relationship. But tonight, I speak as I please, because I am riding in with the Fourth Horseman of the Relationship Apocalypse: Indifference.

Renard and I have paradigm differences. I've mentioned that before. I will present some of the most significant tonight and in future posts. Tonight's entry will certainly reflect my irked and indifferent state.

Paradigm Difference #1- Love

Lisa's Paradigm: "Real love is unconditional." This means you accept the other as (s)he is and allow the other be him/herself, whatever that happens to be.
This is possible because you fell in love with the authentic person, not some "idea" of the person that was crafted in your mind as the perfect solution to your own unmet needs. Therefore, there is never a need to "fix" or alter the other. The light of real love blinds you to what might have been considered "flaws," and actually allows you to love the other for those flaws, because that's just part of what makes your beloved who (s)he is. If you can't give the other person the a freedom to be the truth of who (s)he is, then you are willing to let him/her go so that (s)he's open and available to experience such love with someone who can give it. After all, what you want for the person you truly love is his/her happiness and whatever is necessary for his/her highest good.

Renard's Paradigm: "When someone really loves you, they want to make you happy, and if you really love someone, you should help that person improve him/herself." Never mind that this need for improvement is based only on your own perception. Just take the narcissist's position and assume that your perception is the "truth," and everyone would naturally agree with you. So you should tell your beloved all the things that you don’t like about him/her so that, in his/her awareness of how much you dislike those things, (s)he can change them to please you and make you happy, and ultimately, everyone else as well. This will give your beloved a happier life because (s)he will now be more pleasing to be around, and therefore more loveable to everyone. Let's not address the issue of whether or not the object of your love also sees the offending traits as problematic flaws, nor whether or not (s)he has had others express the same grievances. It doesn't matter if the offending traits have never really been problematic for your beloved before. Nor should it matter if the object of your love is happy with him/herself just as (s)he is. You will simply have to demoralize your beloved and undermine that sense of confidence. But it will be well worth it, because after all, it's your happiness and how you feel that really matter.

Since it's after 5:00 AM, I'll stop here and elaborate in the next post on what all this means in context and on the thing that irked me to the limit tonight.


Blogger Lasciate said...

So now I am wondering if I should comment yet, or wait for more.

Decisions, decisions...

I guess I'll just wait, for now.

6:42 AM  
Blogger LisaPal said...

Go ahead. Comment as we go. I'm interested in your thoughts.

BTW, I was pretty angry when I posted this, but I'm better now.

2:15 PM  
Blogger Richard said...

Angry when you posted this, relly? I wasn't sure. The way you presented Renard's side seemed entirely balanced and from every appearence from his point of view.

(But this is the advantage of this being your blog, your rant, your vent.) Other than a few side comments here and there, I too shall wait a bit.

2:45 PM  
Blogger Lasciate said...

I no longer remember what I was thinking at the time. Must not have been that important.

My initial impression, however, is not so sympathetic, I am afraid. There is a paradox to your paradigm of "unconditional love" in that Renard's paradigm is on a disconnect with yours. It would logically follow that an unconditional acceptance of the person you love includes the paradigm he or she adheres to, or "the freedom to be the truth of who he is" - in his approach to love.

Of course, I realize you mean your approach to love does not have any special requirements, compared to his...which likely seems dreadfully unfair. And knowing nothing of your intimate personal lives, it would certainly be a winning argument to say I have already drifted out into realms I know nothing about.

Therefore, why should I stop now?

I point to (drum roll please): TRADITIONAL GENDER ROLES!!

...which it sounds like his paradigm may very well fall into. For example, the need to take action to resolve conflict is a typical male expectation, whereas the female of said species is expected to nuture, support, and enhance the male's performance in this regard. Problems are therefore "his to fix, with your help" - and if he is a smart man, not that I can see you dating a stupid one - he may very well be approaching problems in an anticipatory manner. That is, pointing to them before they are problematic.

Trying to live up to his responsibility there, ironically, may turn non-problems into problems.

This may not be the case for him, but it sure sounds suspiciously like it to me. We are all strongly influenced by social expectations, even when we think we can rise above them independently.

Then again, I may be way off.

3:07 PM  
Blogger Lasciate said...

Hmm...I hope my commentary wasn't offensive, Lisa. I did not mean it to be, and I don't always realize it when I am. A (Virgo) friend of mine once told me: "...for someone who speaks so well, you'd make a horrible diplomat." Yep, yep.

6:54 AM  
Blogger LisaPal said...

Oh, not to worry. It's VERY difficult to offend me. I'm just a little busy right now and haven't had the time to post, but you have definitely posed some interesting ideas and I have been really thinking about them and how they fit in with ideas that I have about all this, (and they do fit in some ways.)

I'll try to post later this evening, but I've got to take my morning nap now, as I am still on the "go to bed between 4:00 and 5:00 AM and get up at 7:00AM" schedule. Today is the last day of school for the kids, so I will be able to eliminate the latter part of that and sleep later than 7:00AM from tomorrow until summer camp starts. HOORAY!

10:16 AM  
Blogger Lasciate said...


Happy sleep time.

10:58 AM  
Blogger inrime said...

I found your blog on Flickr. I must say I really like your works. I may just come back for inspiration. Cheers! =)


6:44 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home