After thumbing through a quite long and a bit overwrought Atlantic Monthly article titled “All the Single Ladies”, I was struck by some of the juxtaposition the author, Kate Bolick, discusses about the feelings of loneliness she felt in not walking down the aisle with a seemingly perfect man at age 29, and years later, rectifying that decision with an almost feminist war cry to embrace the concept of often maligned spinsterhood, which some would have you believe should only be whispered in dulcet tones and not too close to a Ouija board. This isn’t a test. Women will not fail at life if they marry, and remaining single doesn’t mean there’s a lonely-lady cat sweater with your name on it. Change the rules, if you dare.
The article in my opinion vacillates between being unapologetic about being a single woman over the age of 35, and conversely, almost apologetic as she laments what could have been with the former boyfriend of whom she opted out of marriage. She is at once proud to say that she made the right decision in not “settling”, but yet and still, feeling that little nagging presence that wonders “What if?” It’s a bit unclear if the author wants the reader to give her permission to be single, or to chastise her decision to let a good one get away,and the comments seem to span that exact spectrum.
For me, my feelings are simple. I don’t consider myself a feminist per se. Yes, I advocate for the equal treatment of women, but at the same time I don’t believe any one person should be above or more carefully considered just based on gender, or class, or race, or creed, or any of the big identifiers. So basically I consider myself a humanist. And with regard to marriage, I firmly believe that to be successful in it, you must understand yourself first. But at the same time, be flexible and honest enough to understand that with marriage it means considering someone else in addition to you. There’s room for selfishness at times, but you better be able to take all you dish, and when it’s imperative, compromise your ass off. This sounds easier than it actually is. Becoming a “two” instead of a “one” is a transformation like no other. The pull for ultimate autonomy is great, but there are ways to work together to reach common goals and individual ones. I’ve found that more than just doing things for the two of you, there is this part that is always trying to tramp down societal norms, and challenging what it is to be a married person (and in my case, woman) in a world that still has pretty plain expectations of what that means.
Unlike articles like the one Kate Bolick has written, I don’t ascribe to the notion that if you marry you will instantly be swallowed whole by your union, or that you will lose yourself, or as Bolick infers, that marriage will become a place where you will be unable to live and thrive as yourself. What? Well, that’s just a bunch of crap rolled in Femi-Warlord, Lady Speak. A marriage is what you make it. Period.
It must be said, though, that marriage just may not be right for everyone. That if you’ve been presented with the opportunity to marry and there is something that holds you back, it may be some level of intuition that says perhaps marriage is not the type of thing you’d enjoy, regardless of gender. But to assume that your fate will lead you to become an unhappy married person, who is unfulfilled, who will never attain all that one desires personally, and in business, or in all around power, is ludicrous. There are two kinds of settling. Settling for someone whom you aren’t passionate about, who shares your outlook on life, and settling for being a smaller piece of yourself because your marriage is the larger piece of the “you” pie.
Many of us married women fight against those little pieces of preconceived notion that filters its way into our daily lives.
For instance, after a bit of trial and error, in my nine year marriage, it was determined that of the two of us, my husband is the better cook, enjoys it more, and thrives in this area. Did we set about our married lives bringing with us a bit of the Baby Boomer ascribed mentality that encapsulated our parents and compelled us to believe that as the female, I should always be the gatherer in this “Hunter” “Gatherer” relationship? Sure. Did we have to break those barriers to make our lives fit? Absolutely.
The main issue I have with articles like this is that they almost always view relationships as one static, unchanging molecule that looks the same under the microscope. No! The key, in my opinion, is finding what works for the two of you: Family, friends, articles, television, and any other outside influence be damned.
I’ve actually watched a couple episodes of that Whitney show, and have found the stereotypes to be oppressively stale. I couldn’t believe that in this day and age we’re still discussing the cause and effect of a man checking out a hot chick while in a relationship, and as a result, the woman giving the man “The Silent Treatment.” It was baffling that we’re still having this conversation in 2011. What are our relationships built with? Cobwebs and dental floss? Are we as women so uncertain of our status that a man checking out a butt is the cause for days long discord and potentially the dismantling of our relationship?
This is how I see it. My husband is my partner, and I want to be loved and cared for and cherished by him, sure, but there is no way a butt check calls that into question if our relationship is on solid ground. The steeliest of men will do a butt and/or tit check. They just will. It’s guaranteed, without a doubt, it will happen. Funnily, in my relationship, since my husband is also my best friend, and has been for years, I know what he likes, so as buddies, I can always tease when a pleasing ass is helicoptering in his vicinity. It’s hilarious! He can hold out for like 15 seconds max, and then he looks. Not a full on ogle with drool, just an almost imperceptible slide of the eyes. And my response is usually something like, “Good one, right?”
This is what I mean about making your own rules.
I hate to say it and appear judgmental, but perhaps, it’s more about being so comfortable in your own skin that significant other or not, you feel the most at peace, confident, and fulfilled that you can be. All this evaluation and introspection of what life is with or without a man seems like too much of a litmus test that actually speaks to an era the author is trying to avoid, and gives men more power than they would ever allow us to have over their lives. It is still catering to a stigma. And that stigma is the ever self-evaluating woman who needs to determine if her life has room for a man or not, and what to do if none apply for the job.
I just think a lot of things are based on gut. And if your gut is telling you that the guy you’re with is someone you can see yourself making new rules with until you’re both old and shriveled, then so be it. Live long and prosper together. However, if you’re happiest in the company of your women friends, discovering the world on your own, awesomely. Don’t question it, qualify it, or laud it like some epiphany of the soul. It’s just life, darling. We all have one to live, and thank God it’s not the same one. There is no right and wrong. Only truth and honesty. BUT be prepared for things to change, to feel differently one day, and to totally upend everything you thought you once wanted, and don’t apologize for any of it.
Life is a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death. – Auntie Mame
