small town life
June 27, 2006 by thinking girl
So, I just spent the most wonderful weekend travelling around small towns in Nova Scotia and PEI with my friend who is doing a PhD on the subject of small towns. It’s a neat project: she is writing a novel set in a small town for half her thesis, and the other half is an exegetical piece about the nostalgic discourses that arise around the concept of “small town”. She has been interviewing people who live in small towns to find out more about small town life, and has found lots of interesting things from very generous people who have been willing to share their experiences and thoughts on the subject.I thought I would pose some of the questions to you readers: What does “small town” mean to you? If you live in a small town, what is unique about your small town? Why do you like living there (or don’t like living there)? What do urban dwellers think of small towns and people who live in them? If you live in a city, why do you like living there rather than a small town (or why do you not like living there)? What do you think about small towns?
To me, “small town” is a place in the country. I was born in a suburbs, and grew up in another suburbs, before moving to the city. I can’t wrap my head around the idea of suburbs: a place where you need a car to move around, but where nature is constrained and there’s people all around. There’s people all around where I live, and not enough nature, but I can basically walk anywhere (or take mass transit); I’ve got everything I need for day-to-day life in a 10 min. walk radius. That’s hard to have in the suburbs. But I digress.
Small town brings out the idea of not having neighbours too close (my friend’s house up north is almost a km away from any real neighbours), being surrounded by nature (preferably with a lake). Yes, you need a car to get around, but exept for supplies, you don’t really want to that much.
Many of my close friends come from small towns. I’ve seen patterns in their growing up, especially in how their teenage years were spent: there’s often not much to do in small town, except for sex, drugs and rock’n'roll. But, that’s just a very partial empirical observation.
I despise the suburbs. Someone this weekend mentioned that she felt the suburbs were an attempt to recreate a small town closeness with the convenience of the city, with little malls and whatnot. I thought it was a good observation. Suburbs suck.
Oh boy, this one i know about living in a small town in Oregon for 20+ years, population 4,000 give or take.
I will get back to you. i’m busy defending my position over a my blog. Must stay focused!
I need a life. Not much to do in this small town.
i live in the suburbs…
i went to nyc this weekend - and while exciting and plenty of things to do and great people - it’s a bit too hectic for my tastes… had a great time, but it was the proverbial: great place to visit wouldn’t want to live there…
i need more space and quiet than the big city offers
the thing is, as i’ve felt for a long time, each situation has its advantages and disacvantages wound up in an inseperable ball…
so, while it may be boring here - it doesn’t take the planning of the normandy invasion to get crosstown. the crime is a fraction of what it is in the city, i live in a nice spacious house and not a tiny apartment that costs the same per month, the public schools are great…
on the other hand, there aren’t cool cafes to hang out at, the live music scene is limited, there aren’t a bazillion art galleries here, and dining options for vegetarians are limited…
so, as with most things in life, one gets to choose the problems one has to live with. heck, i got the internet, cable, tons of music, books/magazines and not *too* far away from a big city (cleveland) should i want some more urban experience - this mitigates the downsides of the suburbs
a bit of space, safety for myself and my kids, and quiet - well, i’ve made my choice…
and btw - you are entitled to your opinion, but i do find your anti-suburb comments a bit condescending…
what can i add to this never-ending debate that has not been said before? nothing new. people will always have different views on this issue… and neither will budge!
I moved here to this small town in the hills in Oregon from another small town in Arizona, from another small town in oregon. I guess i lived in small towns my whole life.
My dad was an anti-socieol Hillbilly(he couldn’t spell either)so he kept us isolated. This town I’m in now is unique. It’s a pioneer town & my husband is related to about 1/2 of it. When i first moved here in my early 20’s I didn’t like that everybody knew everybodys buisness. The up-side of that is you soon find out everyone is just as sinful as you. Make an ass of yourself & next week someone else tops your idiotciy(?) & they forget about you.
You can’t talk about anyboby before you find out who they are related to.(you might say something to the wrong person). It’s hard to get used to.
But,when you go to the big city, it is so nice to come home to where everyone knows you.
When you go to the grocery store, you know all the checkers & half the customers.
We live in a big old house in town & can walk everywhere, anytime of the day or night.
My kids have gone to small schools. They’ve had the same friends since Kindergarten. Their graduating classes have had on average 100 kids.
Those are the good things.
it’s funny, debates about city vs. small town have changed, so that now they include these weird little communities that we have manufactured in order to try to have the best of both.
I have always lived in the suburbs, except for a brief stint going to school in Toronto. I grew up in a suburb, moved to another one, and then back to the one in which I was raised. I hate it. I hated the other one, too. To me, suburbs lack personality… unless the houses cost upwards of $400,000, and then the personality of the community is decidedly snobby. So Mike, don’t think of my comments about suburbs as being those of a condescending city-dweller. I’ve grown up and currently live in a suburb, so I’ve got as much insider perspective as anyone. I don’t live here by choice, but as soon as I can, I’m getting the heck out of Dodge. And I’m never coming back.
I’ve never considered what it would be like to live in a small town. I’ve always thought that it simply wasn’t for me. In talking to small town residents over the past few days, I think I could definitely consider it. There seems to be such a wonderful sense of family, something I’m not really familiar with. To me, that’s what the suburbs try to re-create, but can never quite accomplish. I was always concerned with the whole everybody-knowing-my-business thing you describe l>t. And combined with the freedom I felt living in a large city to be exactly who I wanted to be and shed the expectations everyone had of me, I felt I would be unable to truly express myself in a close community like a small town. (my friend with whom I was travelling kept poking fun at my idea that small town folks would “pigeon-hole” me!) But I’ve come to see that small town dwellers are really quite accepting of people who are “different” - in different ways, perhaps, from city-dwellers… maybe more empathetic. I don’t know, but it seems like life in a small town would be nice.
I have always been a fan of cities. That is likely what I will choose for myself when the time is right. I don’t care about stuff like a yard and good schools. I care about lots to do, lots of culture, convenience, and feeling connected to something bigger than just myself.
people have personalities - not “suburbs” or “cities”…
regardless of whether you’ve lived in a suburb or not, you haven’t lived in *every* suburb - and as such, i don’t know how you can make such wild generalizations - seems ignorant to me…
I don’t think I need to live in every suburb in order to make a general statement about my OPINION of suburbs. I have a pretty good idea of what suburbs are from living in them and visiting many. Try not to take everything I say as a personal insult, will you? if you like suburbs and like living in one, That’s great. I don’t. I like the city. You don’t. FINE. Not every kind of community is suitable for every kind of person - which is why there is a variety of places in the world available to choose from. I happen to think suburbs stink. You happen to like them. Good for us both.
I’m sure you can agree that analogies are helpful in expressing ideas… which is exactly what I meant by saying that places have personalities. I think you know exactly what I was trying to express there, Mike. Come on. it’s a turn of phrase. Now you’re just being picky for the sake of picking an argument, because your feelings are hurt cause I don’t like suburbs and you do? At the risk of you taking this as a personal insult, grow up.
why would i care what you like or don’t like?
my point is: if you are going to pontificate and make grand sweeping statements with little objective basis, then you can expect to be called on them….
re-read your words: you never said: well, i don’t want to live in the suburbs - you said they suck - and other comments. for me, that’s a big difference.
i would never live in, say, nyc, or out in the country - but would never make disparaging comments about them - those places are not for me at this point in my life….
i’m outta here…
Exactly - why should you care what I like? Why should I care what you like? clearly, Mike, I was expressing an OPINION. why on earth would I claim to hold any kind of objective truth about suburbs? I never did. In fact, I would argue there IS no objective truth about the suburbs, or the city, or the country. It’s simply a matter of subjective taste. Which is what I was expressing when I said, I hate the suburbs, they suck.
go ahead and call me on stuff, but really, I would think a smart guy like you would know when I’m simply using colloquial turns of phrase to express an opinion. I love a good argument, but over petty stupid stuff like what word I use to express my opinion it gets tired fast. I never said that people who live in suburbs suck. I said suburbs themselves suck. THAT is the big difference. let’s save the argument for something more important, shall we?
Small towns take getting used to. they are not like suburbs. this one anyway. Some people think you can’t be a independent thinker in a small town, but you can. Small town people can love you like family. You have to be able to accept them.
just remember,they were here first. You have to say, “i accept your small town mentality.” Then you can be yourself. All people want is acceptance.
Our town is changing because it is a lovely place & big city people want to move here. They are fixing up some of the nice older homes.
Thinking girl if you ever want to come & check it out, you are welcome. You could stay with us, we have lots of room.
PS; I could use some of your argument skills on my blog.
Well, i think i’m doing OK so far. Trying not to get stuck on a pedantic point.
l>t, you are so sweet to offer me a place to stay! I have always wanted to go to Oregon, it just looks so beautiful. I will certainly let you know if I am able to take you up on your kind offer. I bet we would have some fantastic dinner-table conversations!
In the Maritimes (as we call the grouping of three provinces on the eastern coast of Canada: PEI, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick; include Newfoundland and you’ve got the Atlantic provinces), we call people who move here rather than being born here “come-from-aways”. I’ve lived here for 22 years, but I’m still a come-from-away because I wasn’t born here… even though this is my home. Is that true of your small town, too?
I’ll be right over… to your bloge, that is! yes, pedantic points do get tiresome…
My friend’s dad bought a place in the country more than 35 years ago. Lived there in the weekends until his death. He was always the “come-from-aways” (esp. since he was born in Austria). His daughter, my friend, now lives there and that is where she set up her glassblowing studio. She’s been a regular figure on that town (so small it technically doesn’t exist anymore) from birth, but still, she’s the come-from-away.
I have a few belated comments for Mike.
“so, while it may be boring here - it doesn’t take the planning of the normandy invasion to get crosstown. the crime is a fraction of what it is in the city, i live in a nice spacious house and not a tiny apartment that costs the same per month, the public schools are great.”
This is also true of small towns, even more so if we talk about big affordable houses and wide spaces. “i got the internet, cable, tons of music, books/magazines and not *too* far away from a big city.” You could also have that in small towns (well, with satellite instead of cable).
My comment about the suburb was not that there was absolutely nothing good about it, but that most of what is good about it, is better in the country.
“people have personalities - not “suburbs” or “cities”…” I beg to differ. Any group of people, a crowd, an audience, a town, can be said to have personality.
“why would i care what you like or don’t like?” If you don’t care about opinion, why do you comment on this post, which asked “What do you think about small towns”?
*sigh* - you sucked me back in…
marc: ‘”people have personalities - not “suburbs” or “cities”…” I beg to differ. Any group of people, a crowd, an audience, a town, can be said to have personality.’
well, ok. i’ll buy that. a comment about the “personality” of a city, town, or suburb is then a comment about the people in that place (which is kinda what i said, right - people have personalities - you are merely extending the idea to a group of people). it should not be suprising then, that a negative comment about the “personality” of a suburb be taken personally by someone that lives there, right?
re: my “why would i care comment”… i did not communicate my thoughts well. what i was trying to say was that if the comments made were solely an expression of personal opinion, they wouldn’t bother me. but they did not seem that way to me - they seemed much more…for me, there is a huge difference in saying “this place isn’t for me” and “this place sucks”…if there isn’t a difference in those two statements to you, perhaps you can allow that another person might see that differently
what bothers me is that instantly, my comments are taken as some kind of personal flaw of mine: i need to grow up, i am picking a fight. her original comments seem insulting to me. but never the possibility was raised that perhaps she didn’t effectively communicate her thoughts. instantly, i got a problem….
yeah, whatever….
Aw, Mike, I’m glad you came back.
so, then, are the people who live in suburbs “boring” as you claim suburbs are? You can’t have it both ways… either places have personalities independent of the people in them or they don’t. I happen to think that they do. I think the structure of suburbs is what stinks about them… they mostly have houses close together that all kind of look the same, with strip malls and grocery stores and the occasional restaurant or pub thrown in, but that suburbs in general are, well, generic. I am willing to concede that there are lots of things about suburbs that are appealing to some people - just not to me. the suburbs suck the life out of people - or at least, they suck the life out of a lot of people I know and me too.
don’t be insulted by my comment about suburbs sucking. It has nothing to do with you, or with anyone else who lives in them. It has to do with the way they are set up and laid out and structured.
Now, this seems to lead into an interesting question about the collective personality of groups of people. Can groups of people display traits or characteristics in general that the individual members of those groups do not have?
We call “come-away-froms”, ‘Californians.’
If we are being nasty, “Californicates.”
People around here are experiancing the Californian invasion. People from california or where-ever, buying up our Real Estate. It doesn’t matter where they are from they are called “Those damn Californians”
Oregon & California has always had a thing like that. Once many years ago, back in the 1970’s there was a large Billboard put up on the border between Oregon & california, that said something like “Thank you for visiting Oregon, But we don’t want you live here.” it stayed up for quite a while.
About suburbs, They always get a bad rap in the movies, but there are plenty of people living in them.
I’d have to say there must be good suburbs to live in & bad ones. Having to do with how well planned out they are, the quality of people, the quality of the houses, etc…If you have to work in the city, they can be very conveniant. I’ve never lived in one. But, my brother has lived in a few. he seems to like it, O.K. it could be a great place to raise your kids, I think.
“a negative comment about the “personality” of a suburb be taken personally by someone that lives there, right?” No. I never said that the personality of a group of people is the same as the individuals in that group. Group dynamics do have what some would call emergent features. To answer TG’s question, I’d say “yes”.
*sigh*
spin it however you want. the personality of a community relates somehow to the individuals - and as such, it is reasonable for an individual of that community to take personally negative comments…
You’re right, people may take it personally. Sorry to make you sigh again.
What I meant was that the whole of the group is not necessarily representative of the individuals. There are other factors that come into play (lay out, structure, etc.), and interactions between indivuduals do create something beyond those. I seem to recall a comment (I have no idea where) on mobs having the IQ of a 13 year-old; which is not to say that the individual members are the same.
Completing a long-term move from an outer suburb of San Francisco to a NW US City - this coming weekend - I have an immediate emotional reaction to “city vs. suburb” - as I’ve found the particular suburban area I lived in uncomfortable - most particularly because it is so car dependent- there is no community of people walking - “in a village” - everywhere is drive-drive-drive.
Prior to this suburbia, I lived in a “suburb” next to Oakland, CA USA - which was “urban” in important ways, having walking cores - not anywhere near as car dependent. I enjoyed it!
I love my new city - however -we have a creek as the back of our property with ducks and herons and beavers nearby - hardly “urban” - while being close in and able to get around - for me the best of both worlds. NYC I love to visit, but ….
Small towns - to me can represent a world where - “others” be they outsiders or locals who don’t fit in - where gossip - knowing everyone’s business makes life hard for many or
Perhaps they can also be a “home” where all are accepted as family and where there is a trust - a lack of crime - things being a little slower - can allow a friendliness - that we lack in other places.
I remember Mt. Horeb, Wisconsin - near Madison, WI (USA) - which was a delightful place - as an outsider.
No matter where we live, we need to feel a sense of “community” - that we belong. As one who has felt himself frequently as: “an outsider” - I found small town/suburbia as a child stifling.
Being 55 now - I want to be where I can grow potentially into a world where IF I can’t drive eventually, I’m not totally dependent upon others. I would expect my 19 year old son or 7 and 10 year old step-sons to necessarily want what I do, yet alone any of you.
Thanks!
at the risk of beating a dead horse, i’d be curious to get your take on britney’s latest attempt to avoid the limelight by appearing nude in harper’s magazine….
Geo: thanks for your comments! I hope you like your new city. What you mention is one of the best things I like about cities - the walkability, the small communities organized within the larger city that are so navigable, so vibrant, and so central.
Mike: yikes, are we really going there again!? ok, well, here’s my take, because I saw the pictures and cringed a little bit. However, I’m standing by what I said before, and I don’t think she is necessarily trying to avoid the limelight, nor did I argue that she was. Just because she chose a CAREER that is very public doesn’t mean that her entire life should be subject to mass consumption. Everyone else but celebrities get to have a private life separate from their jobs, but celebrities are not. Any clebrity that manages to have a private life really has to work hard at it - for example, Shania Twain, another singer who has capitalized on her sex appeal but who has made a really big extensive effort to keep her private life quiet - an had to move to Switzerland to do it! I don’t think it’s particularly fair for a celebrity to have to run away to a foreign country jsut to avoid the spotlight. As I said before, Britney needs room and space to grow and learn and develop on her own. Her career is her career, and her personal life is her personal life. Appearing on the cover of a magazine when it’s not stalkerazzi pictures is a career decision - not a personal one.
lol…i was being a little unfair with the britney comment - yet i couldn’t resist…bad mike….
and you are right…there is a diff between consciously choosing to appear on a magazine cover and having photog stalking you snapping photos…
that being said, appearing nude on a magazine cover does seem like an odd choice for someone who wants a little privacy, no? illustrative of my very first comments on the subject: spears repeatedly acts in a manner that wants it both ways…
“that being said, appearing nude on a magazine cover does seem like an odd choice for someone who wants a little privacy, no? illustrative of my very first comments on the subject: spears repeatedly acts in a manner that wants it both ways…”
No, I don’t think so. The fact that she appeared nude is neither here nor there to me. She made a career move to appear on a magazine cover. I don’t blame her for trying to keep her career going despite the fact that she is not in the recording studio or on tour or making new videos. What she wants is attention to her career - not stalking in her private life. It worked - everybody’s talking about it!
I didn’t see what the fuss was when Demi Moore did it, either!
I find it hard to see the attention given to “stars” such as “Britney” (why is it that we use first names to denote “girls” and men we wish to not respect - e.g. “Saddam”
- which you are discussing (now).
Why should she be expected to be “mature” - as young as she is and why should a “star” be any more sensible than anyone else? Obviously when they get arrested or do other things that get extreme negative publicity, everyone knows about it.
I’m far more concerned with how much power to imitate - we give to “stars” which generally teaches superficial things like body size, the need to decorate one’s body in particular ways, or the need to do other superficial things.
How often do stars inspire kids to read much more, to do caring things for others etc. (Some do!)
Thanks!
while you’re entitled to your opinion, people that want more privacy generally do not appear on covers of magazines period, much less nude…i think you’d have a hard time convincing many people that these two behaviors aren’t inconsistent
and, maybe i’m cynical here, but i believe all the publicity about her personal life is at least in part orchestrated very carefully to keep her in the limelight while she has no other professional projects going…
think about it - in the world of pop music, “product” goes stale pretty quick - too long away from the limelight and you find yourselves hosting infomercials or appearing on vh1’s the surreal life, or some other chamber of celebrity hell…all of her attention between “projects” keeps her in the limelight - till the next record…that’s why, in part, i can’t get too fired up about her cries for privacy - guess i question the sincerity…some one with her resources could do a better job disappearing if she really wanted to - i’d guess…
and as i’ve said a million times before in this discussion. i don’t fault her for these choices - but it’s very naive to not see a bit of duplicity at work…wanting it both ways…
i mean, do you really see no conflict between:
a. publicly and loudly proclaiming your desire for privacy…
b. the next week, appearing on the cover of a magazine nude…
no I really don’t see a conflict between the two. One is about her career, and one is about her personal life. Period.
I highly doubt that Britney orchestrated driving publicly with her son loose in her lap or almost accidentally tripping and dropping her son, or her nanny allowing her son to accidentally fall on his head out of his highchair in order to keep her career going. these have been unfortunate accidents, not attempts to put herself in the limelight. if cameras weren’t stalking her every move, we would never even know about these things. keeping her career going is what doing Dateline and the cover shots are about.
Geo, you make some great points about the power we give to celebrities, and the negative effect it can have. why indeed should Britney be held up to standards of high intellect and maturity? she hasn’t been educated, and she is only 24 years old. like I said, she is just a girl who has been raised in a storm of publicity and media frenzy.
well i only heard vague details about the kid dropping incident - and i’m not accusing her of orchestrating that…
that being said, i’m guessing she could have had a greater success “disappearing” from the public eye if that what she chose.
as far as not seeing a connection - again - think in terms of consequences - a person who put themselves in the public eye so often, so flagrantly, etc…ought not be suprised when her privacy is compromised - don’t you think?… again, any norah jones stalkers?
i really don’t hold britney spears to any standards…that being said my guess is that were she to learn that her actions had consequences and people didn’t coddle her and cry “leave her alone” - that she would be happier in the long run… as would you, i and most other people on earth - not that we suffer from the same problems - but attempting to dodge consequences is a big part of the human experience and one that, i think, leads to much trouble and suffering…
which leads me to a questions: do you simply think it is not possible for a female celebrity to act in a duplicitous way, as i’ve cynically described due to all the oppression that exists, or do you simply not think it is true in this case?
I don’t think it to be true in this case. Britney Spears, I don’t think, is orchestrating anything other than keeping her career going through accepted means like interviews and magazine covers. and I agree - she certainly has the money and means to make a great escape Shania- and Angelina-style if she wanted to. But the question is not why doesn’t she choose to, but why should she have to? It’s not SHE that is doing anything wrong, I don’t think, but the media paparazzi who are continually invading her personal privacy.
In other cases, I’m not sure. I would tend to think of Pamela Anderson as a possible example. Pam is a very clever woman. She is very successful and has made the most of what she has to offer. She is not a particularly talented actress, but she has starred in at least 4 TV shows, two of which she produced through her own company. She uses her celebrity to voice her political views and raise awareness about the unethical way animals are treated in food and clothing production, and in HIV and Hep C advocacy. I have heard that she is very encouraging to women in her company, and supports and helps women who work for her to succeed. However, Pam is an iconic symbol of patriarchy. Her success is entirely based on her appearance and her persona is constructed around it. The role she plays is that of a dumb blonde with big boobs - but I’m not convinced that is what she truly is. However, that is what she had to do to be successful in a man’s world, with her limited talents and no education. So, in a way, I think Pam is being a bit duplicitous in that she plays the role of a complete dimwit when she isn’t, and on the other hand, I also think she is a victim of patriarchy. She’s smart for exploiting the system to her personal success, but she is still nevertheless a victim to that same system because her success couldn’t have happened without the existence of negative portrayals of women. It seems men just love a woman who plays into patriarchy. Furthermore, she isn’t making things any easier for the rest of us who do not wish to play into patriarchy in order to be successful. So, does that answer your question at all? I kind of don’t think so, but maybe we could come up with some other examples?
perhaps it is unfair that the price of celebrity is the loss of some privacy. but that’s the way it is - particularly in some cases - where the celebrity is derived largely from superficial characteristics rather than genuine talent…
on the scale of unfairness though- people that work a whole year for what she gets paid for a single appearance, people without adequate health care, etc… that doesn’t seem to move the unfairness needle that much for me…
if she didn’t know what she was getting into then, she ought to by now…
so fair or not, that’s her reality now - which she, in part, created. she *could* do something about it (sad as it might be that she *has* to do something about it) - or choose to whine about it… she chose not too do anything about it - which in my mind, reinforces her choice of career over privacy… one might also suppose (holding my ears, waiting for the explosion) that she might want to lay low for the sake of her kid(s)…
as far as pam anderson goes - well, i’m not a fan - but isn’t it possible that people (and life itself) is simply too complicated to put into little pigeonholes…maybe she actually chose to be the person she is - with all the complications and contradictions and was not oppressed, co-erced or otherwise manipulated into it….yeah, and i know, i know, the most insidious form of oppression is when people think it’s their own choice….but still - does that mean it is inconceivable that this indeed *was* her free choice - though you may disagree with some of her values… in another thread, you took great care to talk about respecting the values of others - perhaps she merely has different values than yours which ought be respected…
and there we are, right back to mister p’s question of when we should respect values that lead to oppressive practices and when we should speak out against them. I, for one, am interested in reducing oppressive forces. Perhaps I mean to say not that we should respect VALUES that are oppressive, but rather that we should respect the PEOPLE who hold those values. I think it is possible to work towards ending practices that are an expression of oppression while still respecting the people who, misguidedly perhaps, value them.
by the way, I think perhaps it would be wise for Britney to seek some shelter somewhere else. I’m not sure if she could, and I still think she shouldn’t have to, but it might be a good idea, for her own sake and her child’s sake. That is a difficult environment in which to raise a child.
since i find talking about celebrities is mostly boring - let’s think of a more mundane case…
let’s say a woman having a baby quits her job to take care of the child…
one could say that she was responding to oppressive patriarchal forces or it could simply be her own choice - she may really feel that is best for her and her family - free and clear - without any pressure
it would be impossible to know which is the case without knowing more specifics about the individual case…
for me, the goal ought to be for women and men to make choices free from pressure from the outside - whether it be pressure to follow traditional roles or pressure to reject traditional roles…
your thoughts?
I think, the only way that it would be absolutely entirely her choice to stay home and raise her child was if she had the power to resist patriarchal influences and still chose a traditional path. I’m thinking of a paper I read last year that looked at the economic status of women. The argument went like this (remember, it’s a hypothetical, not a real example, but does illustrate some key points about women and work): a couple, let’s call them Jim and Ann, are having a child. They have the same job,the same level of education, and work for the same company. However, due to institutionalized sexism, Ann makes 1/3 less money, because it is assumed that women are not reliable employees because they have babies and leave their jobs for a peroid of time to do so, making them not as effective in performance as men, so not worthy of equal pay. (We both know that women still only make 2/3 what men make for the same job and the same work.) If Jim and Ann made the decision as to who stays home and who is the breadwinner when the baby is born purely on the economic status of their family, it will be Ann who stays home based on simple math: Ann makes less money than Jim, so it makes sense for her to stay home. Then when Ann goes back to work, her skills will be diminished, and it will take her a while to get back into the swing of things. The extent to which her skills have diminished is directly related to how long she has been away. Meanwhile, Jim continues to hone his skills at work and becomes more productive and thus makes more money (provided that raises at their company are rewards for performance). If Jim and Ann decide to have another child, the decision as to who stays home and who works is even more distinct and easy. And before you know it, Ann has “chosen” to take the traditional role of wife and mother and keeper of the home.
you can pick this apart if you like, but the fact remains that women make less money than men, and even if you apply the rule of “who makes more money continues to work,” the insidious institutionalized oppression rears its ugly head.
So, then, for a woman to truly be able to make this decision autonomously, she has to be in a position that allows her to transcend this oppression. So yes, I think some women are capable of making such a decision.
“for me, the goal ought to be for women and men to make choices free from pressure from the outside - whether it be pressure to follow traditional roles or pressure to reject traditional roles…”
Mike, I couldn’t agree more. I’ll leave it at that.
fair enough…
your hypothetical case is a good illustration of subtle forces at work… of course, it is possible to create hypothetical cases to illustrate many different possibilities…
i have heard some US african-american politicians that are republicans get criticized by some in the african-american community - for supporting the party which the majority of african-americans oppose and find oppressive- likewise gay republicans…
now i oppose the republican views nearly all the time, but i think that is a ludicrous charge to make - i think it is insulting to the individuality of a person to say they ought support one view or another because the that is the dominant view of their community. it is, in a sense, an example of counter oppression…
i would argue the same idea for women - one ought not fault a woman or the society if a woman *freely* chooses a “traditional role”
knowing, of course, there are different views of the concept of choice and the caveats you would put on the term “free choice”
TG, remind me to tell you about my adventures in Summerside, PEI. Maritimers can be pretty damn nice, but the people of Summerside are the greatest bunch of people on the planet.
well, mister p, please do! consider yourself reminded!
Mike, I think we’re getting to the same chapter, maybe only a couple pages away! I think it is possible for some people to overcome marginalization and be truly autonomous. For example, Oprah. She has overcome poverty, racism, and sexism to become the most successful black woman in history. She has worked really hard to do it, but she has also been really lucky - to be born in the right time and place for starters. It actually drives me crazy when she uses herself as an example of the American Dream that “anyone can do it”. That is such bullshit. Not everyone can do it, because some people work their fingers to the bone and still aren’t in the right place at the right time to take advantage of luck. Luck plays a major part in life, I think. Claiming anyone can achieve the american dream is a slap in the face to those who work three jobs to put dinner on the table and can never get a leg up in life. drives me nuts.
it certainly would be naive to assume that luck or circumstances or external forces, etc…(hate the word luck, but i know what you mean) do not play a roll…
but,as i’ve said before, that kind of thinking can lead to a fatalistic approach to life…
there are countless examples of people that simply refused to be held down by obstacles - say, helen keller, or louis armstrong…
to be sure those cases and others truly are exceptional…and i bring up these cases not to criticize those kept down by the obstacles they face - nor to minimize those obstacles, but to inspire all of us, and to suggest among all the obstacles we face, the obstacles we place on ourselves are significant as well…
additionally, i recognize there are some who are perhaps more capable of beating obstacles than others for a variety of reasons - as a jazz fan, the parallel stories of charlie parker and dizzy gillespie are instructive…both surely faced, at least superficially, some of the same obstacles, poverty, racism, etc… parker however slid into despair, drug addicition and died at an early age, while gillespie lived (apparently) happily to a ripe old age.
i don’t attribute this to any moral shortcomings of parker - who knows what you, i or anyone else would do in those circumstances - and cleary it was unlucky/unfair that parker had to face these obstacles - there are just so many factors - biological, psychological, etc… that might lead one person to become an addict in the face of such horrible conditions and another not too…
so while i recognize the impact of random events/circumstances, i prefer to focus on what michael jordan has said: “i notice the harder i work, the luckier i get.”
the state of one’s life is dependent on some random factors over which one has no control; but it also dependent on the consequences of one’s actions and how one deals with the circumstances one faces. for me, to focus on my choices and their consequences is not to ignore these random factors, but to focus on the half of the recipe over which i do have some control. can a persons actions overcome all the bad luck thrown their way? maybe, maybe not - but one can make the best of any situation…and, in my experience, that involves taking ownership of one’s choices and consequences…
maybe some, because of their background, education, or other obstacles don’t realize this - fine, that’s why it’s important to educate people of it…
the best poker players are not necessarily those who are dealt the best cards, but those who do the best with what they’ve been dealt….
p.s.
and perhaps, not to put words in oprah’s mouth, that is why she preaches such an optimistic view that “anyone can do it” - perhaps her view is that a necessary component in defeating obstacles is the belief that one can… perhaps she has experienced first hand that focusing on the obstacles, rather than on one’s own actions, leads to a fatalistic kind of negativity that leads to a self fulfilling prophesy….
again, i don’t know much about oprah
“…focusing on the obstacles, rather than on one’s own actions, leads to a fatalistic kind of negativity that leads to a self fulfilling prophesy….”
Mike, this seems like an extension of the discussion in the Britney Spears post. In it I commented a couple of times on what I called the “4 Noble Truths about Free Choice”. It was partly inspired by your comments. You never said anything about it. I wonder, did it mean anything to you?
i’ll have to go back and re-read…
at the time, i was focused on my own debate w/tg…
ok - regarding the conflict between the two “truths” en some of the disagreement between my own and tg’s views) - that you describe (and perhaps, ev- perhaps the apparent conflict relates that regarding obstacles is that there are two perspectives, which are both important:
a. the view of obstacles relevant to an individual’s success
b. the view of obstacles relevant to improving society as a whole…
for a., my view is to not focus on the obstacles, but to focus on my own choices and how they effect my success
for b., the focus ought be on the obstacles and what we can all do to create a more equitable society
i don’t view these as contradictory - but view each as the most beneficial response within their respective contexts…
so if my view a. seems to ignore the obstacles, it doesn’t. i simply think it be most beneficial/productive for an individual not to focus upon them within the context of their own success.
i suppose the most rewarding career choices one could make would combine aspects of a. and b. - personal choices made where one transcends the obstacles, that result in improving the lot of society…
while not completely relevant here, i am reminded of a college math prof that would put famous unsolved to solve questions on his final - the thought being that the students would not recognize the problems as famous unsolved problems - and might actually solve them!
Interesting thoughts, Mike. I hadn’t considered how these dualities relate at the individual and societal levels.
Okay, now you’ve given me more to think about.
Speaking of math, I like the equation that states:
2 + 2 = 5
(for extremely large values of 2)
Getting back to the subject of PEI…
I lived in Summerside, PEI, for a few months back in the late 70’s. I went there on a job, which started just as the tourist season ended. At first, I was a bit disappointed to have missed the fun season, but I quickly discovered the best people on the planet.
First off, I had met a number of people shortly into my stay. Among them was a gentleman who apparently assumed I must be in need of employment. I was staying in a rooming house at the time, and I was quite surprised one day, when I got back to my room only to learn that this man had left a message for me. He worked at the local horsetrack and knew there would be a part time position opening up, so he had arranged an interview for me, if I wanted it.
Naturally, I was flabbergasted that an almost perfect stranger would go to such trouble. At first I just assumed that the man was a bit unusual, but I soon discovered that the whole town was that way.
I went to the local mall–The Waterfront Mall, I think it was called–and stopped at a kiosk to have a quick coffee. I went there intending to buy some steel toed boots which I needed for work, so I happened to ask the young woman at the kiosk if she knew where I could acquire some. She pointed me to a store in the mall, but said they might be a bit pricey.
I went to the store she told me about and she was right–they were quite expensive, so I decided to see if I could get them elsewhere.
Two days later, I happened to be back in the mall, so I stopped at the same kiosk. The same woman was working there and she asked me whether or not I bought the boots. I told her no, because they were too expensive. She replied that she expected they would be…so she had taken the liberty of speaking to her boyfriend, who worked at CN Marine, which was several miles away, and she had arranged with him that he would pick up a pair for me, bring them into town for me to try–and if I liked them, I could pay him for them. If not, well, he would just take them back.
Once again, I was flabbergasted.
I also went into a hairshop in the shopping centre. I remember getting a shampoo and a trim. I happened to mention to the stylist that the water in the bathtub in my room pours out at a trickle, so, while I could take a bath, shampooing was harder. (I had longer hair in those days). So she offered to have me come over each day and she would wash my hair for free.
Then there were the taxis. When I needed to get around in a hurry, I would often call a cab. I used to tip the princely sum of 1 dollar, in those days. Stingy as it might sound today, it was considered a pretty generous tip in those days–at least for the fares I was taking. When I wasn’t in a hurry, I would usually walk. I liked walking, and I would think nothing of walking 3 or 4 miles to wherever I was going, as long as I had the time. Several times taxi drivers who had given me rides in the past would see me walking on the rode and stop and give me a lift–then refuse to take my money.
I haven’t been back since then, but I have always wanted to go. As far as I could tell, the laws of the universe were completely different in Summerside, PEI. I will never forget the place.
Go visit PEI:
1-800-565-7421
[TG, are you familiar with the commercial where Stompin' Tom Connors sings that 1-800 number?
"If you'd like to feel just right,
Laugh and have some fun,
Meet some friendly people,
And get some fishin' done,
You can dial to Prince Edward Isle,
It won't cost you none,
Eight double zero
Five Six Five
Seven Four Two One..."]
lol…
2+2=5
for extremely large values of 2…love it - great math geek humor…
reminds me of the teeshirt…
there are 10 kinds of people in the world.
people that understand binary and people that don’t
…
a. the view of obstacles relevant to an individual’s success
b. the view of obstacles relevant to improving society as a whole…
for a., my view is to not focus on the obstacles, but to focus on my own choices and how they effect my success
for b., the focus ought be on the obstacles and what we can all do to create a more equitable society
…
Mike, I am still mulling this over.
TG, have you given this any thought?
As a matter of fact, I have.
I understand the desire to be positive and optimistic even, and focus on what is under your control versus what is not. It’s the whole “common denominator is me” thing. I can’t change X, but I can change the way I respond to/approach X. Yup, this is good stuff. I have been known to say these very words myself from time to time.
However, I have also encountered in my life circumstances that, no matter how I responded, I could not improve. These obstacles were too large to overcome through sheer will power, attitude adjustment, hard work, positive outlook, or whatever you want to call it. Thus, my focus on the obstacles themselves, and trying my best to find ways to break them down, break them apart, jump up and down on them, etc. And seeing as they apply not just to me but to lots of other people, and related ones to different people, it seems unlikely that the obstacles that hold me down and also hold other people down will be solved just be me acting alone on those barriers in the context of my own life.
Mike, you say focussing on the obstacles can lead to fatalism. I say not focussing on them can lead to frustration.
But, I really like your point that believing you can overcome an obstacle is paramount to actually overcoming it. I think this is really interesting and valid. Even if an obstacle is really really huge, perhaps I can overcome it FOR MYSELF. Unfortunately, that is not enough for me. The goal of my life is not to overcome barriers that are imposed on me so that I can have a materially successful life. My goal is to overcome those barriers in such a way that helps knocks them down for others. Only then will I feel that I have been successful. And, I also am quite certain that I will never feel that I have been successful. Furthermore, I don’t think this is fatalistic. I do not look at obstacles and throw up my hands and say “why bother?” Rather I am looking at obstacles and thinking that there are workable solutions to them and my job is to try to get to those solutions.
I am a fairly introsepctive person. I think a lot and analyze everything to death (imagine that!). I know that I have imposed obstacles on myself in my life, and each time I realize it, I do indeed take approach A as per Mike. When I can go no farther, and I am not the one imposing the obstacle, and I cannot find a solution through my own means, then I turn to approach B. I think we can’t ignore approach B and only focus on approach A. I think there are lots of people out there who can get by - and be successful - just by using approach A. But there are millions more who are trapped by obstacles that are out of their control, and who rely on people who are in positions of relative power in society to help eliminate those obstacles. That is, I think, important to remember.
mister p, sounds like you had a really wonderful experience in Summerside. I was just there on my trip. I must say, the people we met in PEI were so helpful and accomodating and kind. And we were asking random people to speak openly about their lives! Everyone was very generous. I’ve always said that PEIers are the very best of the Maritimers. Way nicer than Haligonians. PEI is magic
Yes, I know the Stompin’ Tom commercial!
“…I understand the desire to be positive and optimistic even, and focus on what is under your control versus what is not…”
“…I have been known to say these very words myself from time to time…”
“…Thus, my focus on the obstacles themselves…
…And seeing as they apply not just to me but to lots of other people…”
TG, if I understood correctly, it sounds to me as if what you are saying is completely consistent with Mike’s “a-b” formulation.
The remaining differences, as they appear to me, are just a matter of degrees of preference.
Based on each of your remarks, it seems Mike leans to the ‘a’ side, but he also values the ‘b’ side. While you lean to the ‘b’ side, but also make good use of the ‘a’ side. I would be tempted to label him an Ab-type, and you a Ba-type
Now, I would postulate that there are also people who practice ‘a’ and don’t value ‘b’ at all, and people who practice ‘b’, but put zero stock in ‘a’.
The former I would call Ax-types(where x=exclusive). The latter, Bx-types.
The Ax types might be successful from a hierarchical perspective, but might be hopelessly insensitive to the obstacles society faces.
And the Bx types might very well be so unbalanced in their approach that they would be well-described as fatalistic.
[Personally, I think I could probably think of several people who have been in the Ax and Bx categories, so I suspect those categorizations are reasonably valid.]
Now, on the assumption that you accept the above breakdown, here comes my question:
How does an Ab distinguish a Ba from a Bx? And likewise, how does a Ba distinguish an Ab from an Ax?
[Why do I ask? Because, I think it goes to the heart of the dynamic that drove this debate]
Well, I would think a Ba would tend to be more personally successful than a Bx, because while a Bx would see obstacles and say, “I’ll never get anywhere, I’m going to curl up in a ball and not bother”, a Ba would see an obstacle and try to find a way around/through it, not just for herself, but for others as well (perhaps at the danger of neglecting to promote personal empowerment for both herself and others).
Conversely, I would think an Ax would just be a callous prick and not care one lick about others, while an Ab would perhaps be more concerned about himself, but still display some sympathy towards others. Or, perhaps an Ab would be focussed more on personal empowerment for himself and others while an Ax simply acts like a sociopathic egoist and expects others to do the same.
what do you think of that?
I agree with your analysis.
I guess where I thought I was going with this question, was that, from a Ba’s point of view, Ab’s and Ax’s might tend to talk along similar lines, so the the Ba might have a hard time telling them apart.
Likewise, Ba’s and Bx’s might talk about similar themes even though there is a world of difference in how they actually put them into practice. So, an Ab might tend to not recognize the difference.
Of course, Ba’s may not recognize Bx’s and Ab’s might not recognize Ax’s.
Incidentally, I once had a communist friend who I think was a Bx type, and I have had more than one boss that I think was an Ax type.
I was unlucky enough to have a business partner who was an Ax. YIKES! That didn’t last too long, let me tell ya!
Yes, I think you are very right. An Ab and an Ax might talk the same talk… especially since being an Ax is not exactly the most acceptable thing in society. I’d flavour Ab with a bit more understanding and compassion in language, and an Ax with a bit more of “why don’t you pull up your socks and just try a bit harder?”
and, a Ba and a Bx might also talk a lot about similar things, like the number/power of obstacles, although a Ba is more hopeful and a Bx more despairing.
Could we have invented a new personality typing system?
I took a Kiersey temperament sorter test a few years back. I’m an INFJ.
I’m an INTJ. I thought it was called something else, though.
When I got my readout saying I am an INTJ, it gave a listing of well known people who were in the same category. One of them was Yoda!!! I almost laughed my ass off when I read that.
Wanna write a book?
Mike, this is your system, too.
i think i need to re-read the last several posts after a good night sleep from july 4th revelry…
i’m a little lost in the A’s B’s and X’s right now…
Oh yeah! Happy Independence Day!
mp: i think, what you have described is the difference in mindset for a fundamentalist and a relativist (for lack of better words)
fundamentalists see the world in black and white and relativists have an appreciation for the complexity and contradictions (apparent and actual) that exist in the world.
i think the difference between these two mindsets is a basic problem that is especially severe these days - the world (at least the USA, re:politics) has become very polarized on this axis. to a fundamentalist, a relativist does not appear to stand for anything - is wishy-washy. this is, in fact, used by republicans in our country, to denigrate democrats in campaigns. to a relativist, fundamentalists are overy simplistic and intolerant.
regardless of what you think of my views, i consider myself a relativist. any theories, explanations, etc about anything are merely word models that do a better or worse job of capturing the *reality* of the word, but never perfectly capture it… they are models of reality and not reality - they will never come close to capturing the richness and complexity of the world. as the buddha says, do not confuse the finger pointing at the moon, for the moon
tg: i understand and appreciate what you mean by frustration. for me, the bhagavad gita (gandhi’s favorite book) is instructive. it speaks of right action, but detachment from results. for a long time, i had a problem with the concept of detachment, confusing it with apathy - but it is much more subtle than that - and i believe, instructive to us all…
Mike, your last comment made me think about the tension between the natural human tendency to classify and the equally natural tendency to hate being categorized! I for one am always saying “don’t put me in a box” when someone says to me “I never thought you would do _____________” or “I always thought you were like ____________________.” I hate it, but yet I also love it when I find that someone has something in common with me, or that I identify with the viewpoint of some group or other, because it makes me feel like I belong. (Personality typing is a big one, and I am addicted to horoscopes!)
So I completely get your comment about theories not capturing complexities. Just as labels never really capture the complexity of a person. Good point!
Hmmm, interesting. Detachment from results. Doing the right thing simply because it is the right thing. Sounds a lot like Kant - with a more spiritual undertone, of course. I find the best ideas get recycled around again and again.
well, of course, the bhagavad gita precedes kant by at least a couple of years
yes exactly. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise.
Hi TG,
I was just reviewing your comment where you mention being an INFJ type. I think the link is not correct, but no problem–I googled INFJ instead and found some interesting material. Some of the stuff I read really did sound like you–not that I can claim know you very well.
Here is the first few lines of one of the google results: “Beneath the quiet exterior, INFJs hold deep convictions about the weightier matters of life. Those who are activists — INFJs gravitate toward such a role — are there for the cause, not for personal glory or political power.
INFJs are champions of the oppressed and downtrodden…”
I looked down further on the same page (http://www.typelogic.com/infj.html) and found a list of famous INFJ types an it seems you have an interestng list of type-siblings: Mother Theresa was an INFJ. And Jimmy Carter still is.
Sounds like there really is something to it.
I also googled my type (INTJ) and found a few interesting fictional characters that were INTJ’s. Among them: Gandalf the Grey and Hannibal Lecter
well, that is interesting! thanks for the info mister P! Also among my personality type are Ghandi, Oprah, and Eleanor Roosevelt.
I have a friend who has a masters in psychology. When I told her I was INFJ, she said, “of course!” So yeah, I do think it is pretty “me”. Every time I go back to reread my profile, it seems more and more correct. It’s interesting, I have a close friend who is INFP, just one off, and the differences in the way we look at things can sometimes be so vast!
Oh gawd…I know exactly what you mean…I mean…what is it with those Perception types?
I am not sure how i cam upon your site but I was reading your debaite about “small towns”. I am 23 and have lived PEI(in a town called grand tracidie witch has maybe 50homes) my whole life except for the 6 months I decided I wanted outta here and moved to calgary alberta. I remember saying before I left the island(I was 18 at the time) that I was so stick of being in a small community where everyone knew everyone and there bussiness. so I back a bag drained my piggy bank and hoped on a bus not knowing where I going to get off. I made to calgary before i was almost outta money and decided this was going to be my new home. I remember when i got off the bus I said hi to a lady sitting at a table in the bus stop and when I did her grip on her purse got alot tigher, i found that odd no one ever does anything like that back home, heck I don’t even lock the door to my house when i ain’t home. even though I had alot of fun in those 6 months i was there I remember calling home after being away for a week wanting to come back home. so here i am back home and i am loving it even if I have to listen to my grandfather stories about “when I was your age” and when i go to the store for a thing of milk it takes almost an hour because everyone stops and says hi at least they ain’t scared I am going to rob there purse.
~not sure if this makes any sence to you but it does to a small town girl like me~
hey Melinda,
thanks for responding!
I know the area you’re from! I have to say, I love PEI.
what you say makes perfect sense to me, absolutely. It’s comforting and nice to be around people you know and who know you, and sometimes it takes being away from that to realize it. Good for you for figuring out what is best for you.
all the best to you!