I've ranted on the social contract before. Still the nature of modern existence weighs upon me. The supposition is that an enlightened culture needs a set commonalities to facilitate interactions. That is, we need to know what to expect from our fellows, we need some common ground. This is all well and good, but its success is based upon a grandiose assumption: we have the ability to recognize what we are doing. I never signed the GD contract, have no need for boiler plate expectations. I have come to a point in life where I recognize that my opinions on social mores and folkways are fairly irrelevant. Still, like the brash child that I am, I ceaselessly attempt to cram the square peg of myself into the slender, round hole of the wider world. Doomed, doomed to failure.
**The true issue lies in subjectivity. While the social contract may guide (read "dictate") our behavior, nothing can alter the way in which each individual parses his interactions. It renders irrelevant every considered action because the responses to and from carry different connotations. "Hypothetical" example -- One person has found himself without many to care about or respect. Thus when this person has contact with the relative few that count, his words are designed to communicate the worth that he sees. Unfortunately, these compliments are seen as improper, as too intense, they fall as colors outside of the lines. Does this mean that we should not tell others that they are meaningful to us? Is it necessary to wrap such soliloquies within the brightly papered wrappings of subtle actions? Is this all just some game? Frankly Scarlett, I have no freakin' idea. As much as anyone might explain the "shoulds" of the world to us, it remains unlikely that these suggestions will become habitual without an innate faith in their worth.**
Let me use smaller words. I do not like being told what to do. Recently, I was blessed with the recognition to find a word definitive of myself: pragmatic. In this context, pragmatism means that I don't give a damn about social graces, especially those now antiquated. Let's examine a few that are, pragmatically, similar. Up until around 60 years ago, most assumed that women should stay in the home with the children. No attention was paid to the any abilities such women might have to do other works, no credence given to the contributions they might have made to the world. The masses were given a standard to apply and apply it they did. 30 years ago, the concept of openly gay couples prospering in the world would have been laughable, if not disgusting, to most. Today, not only are such dyads generally sanctioned, but perception has shifted to the point that such pairs can adopt children, hold places in popular culture and often step through life as fearless as any. The assumption is shifting. Now, we come to thorn in my side: the ideal of marriage. Just as there was legality surrounding the acquisition of women's rights and the court battles over gay unions continue, there is a thick legal syrup poured over the breakfast of marriage (it's a contract, yo). More importantly is the issue of stereotype. 100 years ago no one evaluated a woman based on the content of her character of the sum of her skills; she was just a woman. Nothing she could say or do could change that. 50 years ago the same was true of any gay couple, with even more stigma attached. The key is that the beholders, the great unwashed masses of America, cannot be bothered to critically observe those around them. They rely on the simplistic definitions of the current social contract (or the their own more colloquial version, see any extremist). This is the agony that I endure today based within the concept of marriage. For so many the institution represents a utopia rather than a panacea. Regardless of the the divorce statistics, many still see the nirvana of having a partner, any partner, as so wondrous as to ignore any specifics. Just like each woman, each set of homosexual partners, each person is different; each marriage is different. The end result of profiling is to frustrate and agitate those being profiled. As a white male, I suppose that I have felt less of this than many in my life, but now I am subject to full scrutiny. The aggregate expectation of marriage is a noose and a coffin. For all the hard work that everyone says that the relationship itself is, the impossibility is to fulfill others' expectation. I cannot be held to the standard of each individual's perfect marriage. Not that I give a shit what others think, but, rather, I am pretty fucking sick of missing out on the beauty of life because I'm goddamn married.
Given all of this, maybe the assumption has it all wrong. Maybe none of us has any idea at all.
** Probably irrelevant to my argument, but it's rant and this is how it came out.
Fuck it, here's the Mountain Goats.
Better audio, slightly less fun.
