Depression in a larger social context

Love: Need or Want - A chat with my sister

9:37 AM me: You there?

13 minutes

9:51 AM Rose: yes

me: Just rolling a big question through my head and I wanted to get your opinion.

Rose: sure

9:53 AM me: Is love a "need" or a "want?" In the sense of, do you think "needing" someone in your life suggests dependency (and perhaps a fear of loneliness) or does wanting suggest that the feelings are somewhat shallow?

9:54 AM Rose: i think that's a really good question, and one that people just assume they know the answer to

me: Mom once said you should want someone, not need them and I've never really settled my thoughts on it...

9:55 AM Rose: in my experience, its ideal if you know you can be happy alone before you commit to a relationship.

mom is not the most complex theologist

me: No, but she doesn't overthink things either.

Rose: people are not designed to be alone

we are designed to live in communities

small social groups

me: I agree with that.

Rose: its normal to want to share with a group.

in my case, i've always wanted a family

9:56 AM i'm happier now that i live in one

9:57 AM fear of loneliness isn't a bad thing

loneliness is a major cause of depression and despondency

it leads to all kinds of dimunations of quality of life

me: I feel like there is a modern expectation that people develop some sort of self-actualization before they are compatible for commitment.

So they need to strip themselves of "need" until they only want.

9:58 AM Rose: that is an impractical idea and a very modern notion, imo

i got a lot of weird looks from people when i lived in sf and told them i was engaged at 24

there is this sense that you can't commit to someone until you've gone through X amount of alone time

i think its bullshit

9:59 AM it isn't right for everyone and holding out and being on your own does not mean that, when you finally get married at 36, you've done the right thing

10:00 AM in my case, i don't think anyone is a perfect match for anyone else. i spent time away from Rob and decided I liked my life better with him in it.

there were things i liked better about being alone.

my house was much neater

for instance

me: nods

I think I'm very similar.

10:01 AM I like and value my privacy and independence, but as an exception rather than as a rule.

Rose: and those things don't need to be mutually exclusive!

10:02 AM we have a very reactionary attitude about relationships nowadays

its seems to be a reaction to 1950

there are lots of examples of great couples throughout history who keep their own rooms, have their own independent activities, etc.

10:03 AM me: The way I see it... our grandparents (speaking in the general sense) were stuck in a commitment without divorce, our parents had divorce and exercised it, so our generation is trying to find a way to avoid either of those options.

10:04 AM Rose: yes, everyone wants to be happy.

but the thing about successful relationships is that they're going to give and take, have highs and lows

10:05 AM but the people in them need to accept that, but be committed to the relationship beyond all that

i think when you get in trouble is when you start looking at your spouse/partner as the person depriving you of something

10:06 AM or, god forbid, if you have the idiocy of looking at them as someone who "should" be different

me: Indeed.

Rose: are we talking about what you wanted to talk about?

10:07 AM me: Pretty much.

Rose: its hard to talk about relationships theoretically

because you only have your own experience to go on

me: I guess its not exactly a "one or the other" scenario.

Rose: i think that is a healthier way of looking at partnership and independence.

they're a spectrum

10:08 AM not a choice

me: Want-Need spectrum?

Rose: that is also a spectrum

10:09 AM sometimes we need others and its ok

sometimes we need them because we're avoiding something

i think a key may be to look at the relationship from NOT your own standpoint

think about the other person. are you giving them the best parts of yourself in the relationship

10:10 AM me: Hm...

Rose: meaning fidelity to their growth and happiness, willingness to compromise, willingness to communicate even when its really hard to do so

10:11 AM me: nods

Rose: if you aren't giving them those things, then its not really a relationship, right?

then its wanting someone to make you happy

me: True.

10:12 AM Do you mind if I repost this on my blog? I find it interesting.

Rose: not at all

i like my soapbox

x)

A thought

It is far easier to sense that something is wrong than to tell someone why it is wrong, and easier still to tell why something is wrong than to make it right.

Easier than both of these is to deny that anything is wrong at all. This only becomes difficult when faced with overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Then you can only deny harder or accept the burden that you have avoided.

Spoiler Alert

I'm posting this more for the video than the music.

If someone can figure out what the video has to do with the music, please let me know.

Boyz n the Ring

Harry Potter's quidditch commentary

Well, the embed was disabled by request, but check out this awesome narration on the Harry Potter movie. He does the entire movie, which is a bit tedious, but this scene alone is hilarious.

"And the American way..."

I just finished reading this article by Bill (Fables, other stuff) Willingham. In this article, he condemns the fact that Superman's battle for truth and justice often no longer includes the words "and the American way."

Are you fucking kidding me? You have no idea why this might be?

This article was written in early 2009 after 8 years of having our country and its ideals raped by an arguably elected leader. We invaded two countries (at least one without provocation), wiretapped our citizens, and justified torture. This was just the big stuff, of course. I won't count the shitty response to Hurricane Katrina or Cheney's hit squad (oh wait, just did).

The fact that Willingham quoted Rush Limbaugh in the article should tell me everything I need to know.

So I guess the heroic American qualities that Willingham wants to see involve Superman waterboarding Toyman? Or shoving an electric pear up Lex's ass?

Just like how the pledge of allegiance added "under God" as propaganda to distinguish between God-fearing capitalists and godless Communists, the phrase "American way" was added to Superman's oath to make Americans feel like their way is the right way. It first appeared in the Superman radio program of 1942 to reflect wartime patriotism. It was dropped by the end of the decade and returned again in the 1952 TV series to (once again) reflect the Cold War with Russia.

The problem with having a character who is both absolutely moral and yet a protector of the law is that often laws are immoral... if not by their design then by their implementation. If the law conflicts with what is basically "truthful and justified," the law should not be obeyed and a moral person will risk legal consequences to support their values.

Why do so many writers exclude "the American way" from Superman's oath? Because it portrays him as being narrow-minded and jingoistic. It encourages that "American way" as if that were better than other ways. It identifies him as supporting American interests above other interests.

The Superman that most writers want to portray is the populist Superman who supports "the human way," who identifies Earth as his home rather than one country.

This is the same reason that the Justice League of America was renamed the Justice League in the '80s (and later, Justice League International and later still, JLA). The "America" in the name suggested a preference for defending or representing a single country, but to have the most powerful and trustworthy heroes on the planet represent such narrow interests seemed laughable, if not insulting to anyone outside our country.

But I suppose the fact that his article is read by hundreds if not thousands says all it needs to. Don't worry, Bill. I'm sure that you will be given the opportunity to make Superman a fascist again. It's all cyclical.