alexis in the city

What am I Doing That’s Unreasonable?

Since I’m perfect, it’s really irksome to me when I see people making unreasonable decisions - based on emotions, selfishness, impatience, instead of reason, facts and rationality - that are going to screw up their lives (I’m also clairvoyant).

Of course I’m kidding. I’ve made some pretty unreasonable decisions over the course of my life. Maybe this is why when I see people doing the same I want to jump into their lives and press the “pause” button. I’ve been lucky in that my ill-advised choices haven’t caused long-term dysfunction or narrowed my options in any extreme way. The most “unreasonable” choice I always point to was getting married too young - that one took the longest to bounce back from (two years and a well-qualified therapist) - but there have been others: Ryan and I becoming self-employed within a week of eachother; getting two dogs; moving to SF with no apartment and no jobs.

I’m not at all risk-averse and wouldn’t necessarily lump “risky” in with “unreasonable” but it’s knowing the difference that has recently given me pause to think. We’ve made a lot of risky decisions too: buying investment properties; traveling Asia; moving to Portland for Ryan’s startup. And while these things haven’t always worked out incredibly smoothly, I would say the difference is a). they didn’t/don’t have the potential to wreak real havoc on our lives; b). if there were/are hiccups, we’re equipped (financially, relationally, logistically) to handle them without severe detriment to our long-term goals; and c). if things go well they have the potential to actually bring us closer to our goals.

But how to know the difference? When I’ve made unreasonable choices in the past, of course I didn’t think they were ill-advised. Which is perhaps what’s so scary to me, and why I want to kick people when I see them making unreasonable mistakes: things like having kids on an unstable income; getting married without considering the implications; taking out loans; etc. When Ryan and I see people making decisions we question, it’s compelled us to look at our lives and ask - what’re we doing now that we’ll look back on later and deem was unreasonable?

I think the above criteria is a good place to start but it’s also hard to be objective when you might have to tell yourself “no” regarding something you really want. I had a big breakthrough this year when I decided to take time off from grad school. We could’ve finagled a solution that would’ve allowed Ryan to be in Portland for his startup and me to be in NYC for school but it just wouldn’t have made good sense and it ran the risk of significantly damaging our relationship and our finances. Since Ryan’s opportunity was time sensitive and mine wasn’t (I could defer for a year), I decided that waiting a year and saving ourselves from the potential fall out was well worth deferring my immediate wants.

I was pretty happy that I was able to remove myself from the situation enough to make a (relatively) objective decision and I hope this shows I’m not just getting more anal in my old age, but also a little wiser. In what areas have you been able to remove your blinders and start making reasonable choices?

#Occupy Festivus

I’ve been avoiding this Occupy stuff because I knew that if I looked into it, I’d just get angry. I know myself pretty well so I was, of course, right - but I decided to at least get familiar with the list of demands from the protestors. What I found was a list of a couple dozen grievances covering just about every ill known to (American) humanity. There’s the stuff you would expect about corporate pensions and salaries and those responsible for the economic meltdown, but there’s just about every other issue on there as well. From repealing the death penalty, to stopping the war on drugs, to enacting a better environmental policy, to passing health care reform, and so on and so on. Even if some sort of meeting were to occur between the two sides, how could they begin to make headway at all with such a Festivus-like airing of grievances? The possibility seems laughable.

So what seems to have happened is everyone who has some sort of complaint - or just likes a good rage against The Man - has thrown their hat in the ring. There’s no need to atone for any financial missteps you may have taken when you can just blame someone else. It’s much more fun to march around with friends than to hustle and get creative and work - and at the end of it all, pay a huge portion of what you earned in taxes.

I’m not that old, but I feel so far removed from the current ethos when I talk about how Ryan used his time in the military as a way to (mostly) put himself through school (going double full-time at two different colleges). Or how we kept paying our mortgage even though we were naive and signed off on an adjustable rate loan. Or how when I got laid off, I booked up freelance work too fast to qualify for unemployment. Or how I’ll work my way through grad school instead of taking out loans.

On the one hand I’m mad at the people who are using this as a way to shift the blame of their less-than-ideal financial or economic circumstances. On the other hand, I’m mad that the movement couldn’t pick one or two core principles to focus on. People are clearly upset. They clearly have an audience. Reform of some kind arguably needs to occur. But they’ve seemingly wasted an opportunity for that to actually happen by airing every possible grievance and expecting something to be done about it.

I know there are people who have a singleminded reason for participating in these demonstrations. For them it’s not part of a blame game or a bandwagon. But I fear their efforts for targeted, peaceful reform is being drowned out by everyone else - you may know them as the 99%.

Yes, I have more than enough … but don’t tax me

There seems to be a sentiment pervading American thought that top earners deserve to be taxed more. The thought spreads from the rich and influential like Warren Buffet, to random people on the street with cardboard signs. Apparently, the theory is that the rich have enough to shoulder the burden of those who do not, and so should have to give more to the government.

My first problem with that statement is its complete subjectivity. Who decides what “enough” is? By a global standard, probably 99.99% of people in America have “enough.” Do we cut people off after they’ve had a single meal for the day? After they’ve invested in a single pair of shoes? After they’ve bought their first house? After they have a closet full of furs? After they start driving a Hummer? I’m not saying there should be no taxes, and for the purpose of this post I don’t want to quibble over exactly what that amount should be - but rather point out a flaw in the logic of “enough.”

My second problem with the above statement - and the crux of my argument - hinges on the second half of the sentence: the idea that we should have to give more to the government. Yes, I have more than enough but I believe *I* am the best allocator of my resources - not my family, not my church and certainly not my government. I believe that as I allocate my resources according to my decisions, not only do I provide a bigger benefit to the people and organizations to whom I give charitably, but I also provide a bigger benefit to the economy as a whole.

So yes, I suppose I stand with the 99% … but I do so through a desire for personal benevolence, not forced “charity.”

I promise to never …

After spending hours researching parenting and mommy blogs for work, I’ve become convinced that far too many people apparently lose their mind while pregnant or after becoming parents. What else could inspire things like babymoons and push presents? I’ve always just assumed I was one of the sane ones and would remain so should I ever have children or become pregnant, but I see now that everyone must think that. As a favor to future me (and to any kids future-me might have), here is a list of things I won’t do as a parent of a small child:

continue reading »

I Did Not Marry my Best Friend

Really? I doubt it.

You’ve seen it - blog posts, status updates, even wedding invitations professing that the person is marrying/has married/will marry their best friend. But I highly doubt it. Yes there are exceptions - people who develop a deep friendship first (with no ulterior motives); couples whose love grows from a platonic relationship and blossoms into romance. That’s impressive. And sweet. I’m not completely devoid of emotion - even I (and my Grinch-sized heart) can admit that. But I think what happens to most people is actually the opposite of best-friends-to-lovers: they are attracted to someone or come romantically involved, develop a relationship and realize they’re closer to that person than to anyone else in their life. That’s good. That’s probably what should happen.

But I would never refer to my husband as my “best friend.”

I have a handful of best friends, even a couple male best friends, but I didn’t marry any of them. I married Ryan. Just like I have a different type of relationship with each of my best friends, so too do I have a different type of relationship with Ryan. None are better or superior; just different. Of course - if it came down to it - I would prioritize my relationship with my husband over my friendships, but that doesn’t make him my best friend.

I think I understand what people are trying to get at when they refer to their spouse in this way - that their relationship is deeper and more significant than any other. But I don’t think that really does a thriving marriage relationship justice at all. I’m absolutely not one of those soul mate-y type people but a good spousal relationship should have an intimacy - and no, I don’t just mean sexually - that a friendship doesn’t have. There should be a vulnerability, a level of communication, a degree of understanding there that even a best friendship doesn’t transcend.

That’s not to denigrate the role of friendship or say it is in any way inferior to marriage. On the contrary, I think healthy friendships outside of your relationship with your spouse are vital to any successful marriage. I need the aspects of my friendships that speak to me in ways my marriage doesn’t. I need to draw on the history I have with my high school BFF; I need to work through what it means to be an independent wife and woman with someone who fundamentally gets where I’m coming from; I need to relive my college glory days with the person who was there through the thick and thin of it. And so forth.

Conversely, that’s not to denigrate the role of my marriage in my development as a person. Rather, it’s important to acknowledge that we are dynamic, multi-faceted beings that gather fulfillment and nourishment from a variety of channels. To put that all on the shoulders of one person is an assurance that those shoulders will eventually falter.

And that’s why Ryan is not my best friend; and I am not his.