(no subject)

[violachic]

Glossing over, for the moment, the incredibly classist implications of this article, there is something I just don't understand.

Two quotes (bold emphasis mine):

"It's not so fun anymore," says Duyn, 33. "I'm ready to be an adult now. I'm at the age where I should be taking care of a partner or a child, not some stranger I just met a few months ago."... "It's hard not to ask the question," says Duyn..."will I have roommates for the rest of my life?"

and

"There are certainly benefits to having roommates," says Joy Delp, 37, a New Yorker who has lived with roommates -- including friends, strangers, coworkers and an ex-boyfriend -- since graduating from college. "It's nice knowing you won't have to go home to an empty space. But at the same time, I find the prospect that I could be 40 and still living with roommates incredibly depressing. It feels like failure not to be in the kind of relationship that you can move forward and not to be able afford to live on my own."

As someone who purposely lives with "roommates", I don't understand the attitude that it is somehow less than "adult". Ever since I started living in IC, I've had people comment that it somehow isn't "mature", that it isn't taking enough responsibility, etc. Why can't it be just another lifestyle choice, instead of something we put a value judgment on? I can completely understand that if one's choice and goal is to live on their own, it can be frustrating to not be able to achieve that. But why does it have to be a "failure" to live with other people? If you are in the position where you have to live with roommates, why not make that relationship as intentional as possible? Even if it isn't a romantic/sexual relationship, it is very possible to have relationships that "move forward" (whatever that means to you). Living in IC has been simultaneously the hardest and most blessed thing I've ever done. I don't intend to end it just because its supposed to be less than "adult".

Comments

[ironheadjane.livejournal.com]

When I read those quotes (having not seen the article) all I can think of is those people who are saying that - that's their shit. Their conception of themselves, where they wanted to be, is sunk. The easiest way to conceptualize *why* they're not where they think they should be is because they're "immature." Instead of seeing it as a conscious choice that they've made, they've seen it (like many people in America today) as something that has been unwittingly thrust upon them, through very limited fault of their own. They have a condition - immaturity - that has impeded them from being where they want to be.

Another possibility, IMHO, is that they've chosen a lifestyle that for some reason or another, is more comfortable and less stressful than searching out what they think is "mature." They choose to find fault because something in them tells them they should. People then have a tendency to turn that self-judgment outward to others. Human nature, it is.

[name-omitted.livejournal.com]

You are being very nieve if you think that calling living with roommates a "lifestyle choice" is going to minimize people putting a value judgment on it.

[ironheadjane.livejournal.com]

And you are naive (and insulting) to imply that I said anything of the sort. In fact, I said that those quoted were putting a value judgment on that lifestyle choice (whether they were conscious or not of their having that choice.) These are two separate issues, a choice of a lifestyle and the emotional response to having a choice at all. Some people make their choices consciously, others do not. People often apply values irrationally. What you term what they're applying that value to has nothing to do with what you call it.

An example being giving the exact same rights to gay couples as heterosexual couples with regards to marriage, but calling it something differently (like civil unions). Some people say that it's the word marriage that's the issue, and calling it something differently changes the judged value. Others (many) who oppose gay marriage will contend that it doesn't matter what you call it, it's offering the rights of gay couples to have the same privileges as hetero couples, so while the name may be different, the concept is the same. What you call it doesn't change it's perceived value necessarily. Sometimes, it can, but that's a separate issue from ANYTHING I was discussing in my above comment.

[name-omitted.livejournal.com]

I had not meant to reply to you. This was meant as a general reply, and Given the context of your comment, yes, it would be insulting. I am sorry.

[ironheadjane.livejournal.com]

No worries. I find this particular layout to be a bit confusing when I'm trying to reply to an individual comment.

[ironheadjane.livejournal.com]

And, small world, you know the Alaska crew that I know. Interesting.

[violachic.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure who you are replying to.

[violachic.livejournal.com]

To be honest, Kevin, I find this kind of insulting, too. Why should anyone put a value judgment on anything, be it the way you choose to live your life, or what you decide to call it. I know that "lifestyle choice" is a buzzword for some people, but quite frankly, this is a choice I have made for the style in which I live my life- who gives a fuck what other people care that I call it? Its not their business. No, there are many people who don't have a choice- in fact, I am technically one of them, and have been for several years, there is no way I can make it by myself- and I think that it sucks beyond measure that it is the case. But even if we had the perfect utopian economy, I would still make this choice- and in either situation, it is neither better nor worse than the choices other people make for the way they want to live. Want to get married, have a few kids, and move to a house in the suburbs? Fine. Want to be polyamorous and live alone? Fine. Whatever.

[name-omitted.livejournal.com]

People shouldn't care.

Look, I have a horrid head cold. I am coming off as a lot more strident than I mean to be. I am sorry to you as well.

All I meant to say is that your statement "Why can't it be just another lifestyle choice, instead of something we put a value judgment on?" presupposes that people, in general, are tolerant of "lifestyle choices." They are not.

I am going to bed before I muddle this anymore. The important part of this message is that I meant no offense, nor did I mean to condone people being ass-hats. I was just trying to give rational for dismissing them altogether. They won't give anyone slack for lifestyle choices, because their lifestyle choice is to judge themselves more worthy than everyone else.

Screw 'em

[violachic.livejournal.com]

Ach, I understand now. I am sorry for jumping down your throat- I did find the original comment (or at least the way I read the original comment) to be out of character for you.

I hope you are feeling better soon!