My LDR took place in a network of people. The way in which people interacted could be rather provocatively described as "incestuous" (operating within a discrete "family" of people) or more appropriately described as a relatively closed circle. As I go along transcribing bits of tapes and written correspondence, it is clear that an outsider might become lost in all of the initials and who the players are. I'm typing this up to help anyone who decides to pay attention understand who is who.
This network of pen pals was drawn together based on two factors. The initial factor was that all of us, except T, were fans of the rock group KISS. Once we connected via classified ads in magazines that ran ads to help us locate other fans, we then connected via referrals from one another. T found me through both J and A.
S (female):
Me, the writer of this blog. A graduate of a local state college with a degree in psychology who once worked at a halfway house for people who were either hospitalized or institutionalized for serious mental problems. I also lived abroad for 23 years and was a teacher for quite some type as well as have worked as a writer both of textbooks and magazine articles. I was born in Pennsylvania and grew up in poverty in a small rural town.
T (male):
The object of my long-distance affection and relationship. A graduate of a local state college with a degree in business and a minor in finance. He grew up in a middle class family in a small city close to Stanford University (California).
J (female):
T's first girlfriend who was a pen pal of mine for quite a few years before T was given my address and started to write to me. J worked a series of dead-end jobs and went to beautician's school for awhile. She and T were together for nine months in a long distance relationship. He ended their relationship. J lived in a blue collar suburb of Pennsylvania and met T via a pen pal of hers who was an in-person friend of T's.
A (female):
T's second girlfriend who was also a pen pal of mine, though for fewer years than J. A got a degree in journalism from a private college in Connecticut (where she has always lived). A was in a relationship with T for nine months. She ended that relationship.
D.H. (female):
A mutual pen pal of both J and S. She was younger by about five years than most of the members of our network of pen pals. She lived in Georgia and worked at a county courthouse.
H (female):
A mutual pen pal of J, A, and S. She lived in Alabama and visited S as well as J in person once.
Tuesday, May 26, 2015
Sunday, May 24, 2015
Correspondence July 11, 1987 (cassette tape - tape 1)
The numbers on both tapes were written by T. I slapped my shorter labels over the top of his, but the one that covered side 1 fell off a long time ago revealing his handwriting.
On July 6, 1987, T called me on the phone for the first time. He did this with the help of a little sleuthing as he called me while I was at work and didn't have the phone number. What he had was the name of the city I was working in at the time and the social services agency that had employed me. The call cost him 45 cents a minute. In 2015, that was equivalent to 97 cents per minute. It was a steep price to pay to talk to me in real time, but I was thrilled that he had done so.
My little office in a converted former funeral home did not receive calls directly so the secretary in the main office intercepted and transferred them. She wasn't the brightest bulb and seemed to have some hearing comprehension issues to boot. When she told me someone was on the line for me, I didn't know that it was T despite her giving me a name.
Select transcript July 11, 1987 (tape 1):
Let me begin by telling you how much I really, I mean I already said this, this'll be the third time I said it, I already said it once on the phone, once in a card, and now on tape, how much I truly and sincerely appreciated the call that you gave me at work. I mean now my tone is down quite a bit from when I got the call, but after I got it, I ran down to the secretary and I said, "That was one of my friends from California! Oh my God, I can't believe it!" And then I was so excited that you called that I said, "I'm too excited to work!" So I walked up to the post office and mailed the tapes that I was going to send you.
I made them all on Sunday and I planned on mailing them on Tuesday when I got off of work. I can leave work sometimes* and walk to stores and walk to the post office obviously or I wouldn't have mailed that one package of yours from (city where I worked). But, I was so hyped that I had to do something so I trotted on up to the post office which is a nice quarter-mile hike there and another quarter-mile back. It's decent exercise.
The really funny part was when the secretary answered the phone, she must've got your name wrong or the connection must've been bad or something because she said-she buzzed me up in my office... She goes, "T--off" T--olof". I didn't know who the hell she was talking about. If I had known that it was you, you wouldn't have been on hold for about the 20 seconds that you were on hold. I would have got on that phone a lot quicker. I didn't know who it was when I picked up the phone. I thought, "Gee I wonder... " It did flicker through my my mind, but I thought, "Nah, it couldn't be."
But, I was so happy for you to do that. Nobody's ever done that for me. Very few people have even called me here at my home let alone called me at work. Wow! I know it was no big deal to you... well, I don't know if it was a big deal to you or not. I guess 45 cents a minute should have been a big deal to you. I just want you to know that if you ever feel like doing that again, I'll appreciate it just as much.
In connection with this, people calling people-to me-it's always a very special thing when a pen pal calls or anybody calls long distance whether it be a pen pal or a friend or whatever because they're paying for it and they're paying quite a bit. You can do it on tape all the time and it's just an extra special thing (to be called on the phone). I have a question for you because I'm going to relay an experience. Have you ever called somebody and not had a good reaction other than A? I don't know because, from what you've told me, there have been times when A-I don't know, you say that the calls go well regardless of what sort of mood A is in-so I better not say regardless of A.
Have you ever called anybody long distance and gotten a really bad reaction like they don't even want to talk to you because I've had this happen to me twice and it's been the same person. (Story about how I called a mutual pen pal and she ended the call or put me off each time.)
...
I don't know how it goes with you and long distance calls, but it's very, very rare that somebody that somebody calls me and I make sure that I end the call because I have something to do. I may at some point say, "Oh, geez, should I cut this short so that your bill's not going to be ten stories high," because I do have concern for that. I know that I didn't have too much concern for that when you called the second time.** Yeah, let's keep him on the line! For the most part, if I'm going to say anything about the length of the conversation, it's going to be out of concern for their financial welfare, but realistically, maybe I shouldn't mention that. It may be in poor manners, but I do care about the people who call me and I do care that they've been on the line with me for an hour and a half. Even though I've been enjoying it tremendously, it's just sometimes difficult when you make a call to end it because it just goes well sometimes.
*Generally, I had to be present at my workplace at all times. One program worker was obliged to be present when clients were in the residential facility. We could only leave if someone else from the office was present to "babysit" the clients. My boss or another worker would usually give me a break for a short walk or a breather during my 24-hour shift so that I could get out for at least a little while each day that I worked so that I did not have to be cooped up in the house for the entire day.
**T wanted to talk to me longer than he could initially because I had work responsibilities, so he called initially then called me back later. There were two separate calls, but the initial intention was for there to be one call.
*****
These days, I've been told that people not only do not appreciate phone calls, but actively would like to avoid receiving them. One of my friends said he rarely or never picks up when people call him and prefers that they text him or leave a voice mail. It seems incredibly ironic that those of us acting at a distance so valued talking with one another in real time that were willing to pay significant amounts of money to do so. These days, people can do it for free and do not want this happy privilege. It seems like we devalue and take things for granted because they are free or cheap and easy.
Monday, May 18, 2015
"Being Real"
A very long time ago, I once read a book by a man who had lived in Japan during its economic "bubble" era. This was back in the days when Americans were freaking out because the Japanese were buying up their real estate and works of art. Local governments in Japan had so much money that some of them purchased gold-plated statues for their municipalities. It was an age that the Japanese felt smug and superior about, and thought would never end.
Eventually, the bubble deflated and Japan entered a long and slow decline. People started to forget that it was ever that much of a threat and eyes turned toward China as the next looming economic powerhouse. The book I read, called Japan: It's Not All Raw Fish, is as outdated as the idea that the Japanese were going to take over the world. However, I have never forgotten something that was mentioned in the preface as I am continually reminded of it as I go about my days in America. An old Japanese lady said something to the effect that Americans felt their opinions were facts. She was absolutely right, though she certainly would have gone further in expanding on that had she known Americans even better.
One of my frustrations as someone who was repatriated after 23 years of life abroad has been the limited scope of most American lives. Not only do they tend to live in little bubbles existences, and this applies even when they travel for tourism, but they are absolutely certain that their limited worldview is the only correct one and that it is a very informed one at that. I have had more than one discussion with an American in which a person has asserted that "we don't know" something to be true when the truth is that he or she does not know something to be true because that information has not penetrated the bubble they've constructed around them. The attitude is often, 'if I don't know, it is not true or known by anyone.'
It has been equally the case that I have encountered people who apply the same arrogant assertions to many other situations. If I can't do it, then it can't be done by the average person. If I haven't experienced it, it does not happen. If I don't believe it, it does not exist. Even if someone has indeed done it, they immediately deny the veracity of the claim or they insist it is an outlier experience and therefore invalid as a general rule.
My most recent experience with this involved an exchange with a woman in an LDR who insisted that the parents of young folks in distance relationships couldn't understand how they could work because, when those old people grew up, they lacked the "tools" to conduct such a relationship. Since I had my relationship in 1987, I took issue with the idea that such tools were indeed insufficient to carry on such relationships. She snarkily insisted that she was right and asserted that she was just 'being real' by saying that people could not conduct LDRs without the benefits of instantaneous text communication and video chatting. That was what was "real". My experience was obviously an outlier because she couldn't imagine making a relationship work with the limits that I did. Her experience was the arbiter of "reality," and my experience bounced right off of her bubble rather than find its way in and become part of a new version of truth.
This attitude stunned me because she was adopting the exact same posture as all of the doubters who sit in judgment of LDRs. For them, they believe that an LDR can't be "real" because it is a requirement that you be in person. When they say distance relationships don't work, I'm sure they feel they are also "being real" by setting the bar at needing physical proximity because they couldn't have a relationship any other way. She set a bar as well. Hers was just having access to technology. She even said that she and her boyfriend could not have their LDR without those things. I wonder if this is an opinion that she has shared with her boyfriend. Hopefully, they are on the same page in this regard or someone could end up getting hurt.
I'm sure that the reason she got a bit uppity with me was that I said all that was necessary was commitment and dedication. The tools help, but ultimately I said that it was about what you put into it, not how you carried through with it. This idea was likely threatening to someone who felt her LDR would fail without the comforts and immediacy of all that cell phones and internet connections bring. She probably felt I was questioning her dedication and commitment, but the truth was that she was the one questioning it as a result of what I'd said as I knew nothing about her relationship until she made her assertions. If she couldn't make her relationship work without her necessary tools, then no one could... except for me, that freak outlier. It was that American attitude I've grow so tired of encountering rearing its head again.
People who were born before me suffered far greater difficulties of separation than I did in my LDR. Men went off to war and left their families behind. Their wives still loved them and they wrote very infrequently and constantly faced the threat of permanent loss. Diplomats and political figures traveled during times when sea voyages were common. John Adams adored his wife Abigail, but they endured huge separations—sometimes spanning over a year—as a result of his career. Love somehow maintained itself despite enormous obstacles and relationships remained intact. That is what I'm talking about when I say that it takes devotion and commitment and is not dependent on the tools at your disposal. It's about a shared perspective that you have a connection and do whatever you can to maintain it, not about how you do it.
I wouldn't recommend that anyone pursue an LDR lightly and I certainly wouldn't recommend ignoring every possible tool at ones disposal to ease the difficulty. However, I will say that, if you can't have the relationship without a particular type of communication, then it's time to think about what your relationship is all about. Absence is supposed to make the heart grow fonder, not make it grow bored, cool-hearted, and restless.
Perhaps this is an "evolution" of relationships based on the modern age. That's the same age that has dramatically reduced our attention spans and decreased our distress tolerance until we've all turned into stimulation junkies who can't bear any deviation from our expectations. It's what has us following Twitter and screaming at a barista who puts one too few squirts in our vanilla latte. Perhaps I was a freak outlier, but I have some confidence that some people are made of similarly devoted stuff when it comes to their LDRs, though I'm guess that "being real" girl is not among them.
Eventually, the bubble deflated and Japan entered a long and slow decline. People started to forget that it was ever that much of a threat and eyes turned toward China as the next looming economic powerhouse. The book I read, called Japan: It's Not All Raw Fish, is as outdated as the idea that the Japanese were going to take over the world. However, I have never forgotten something that was mentioned in the preface as I am continually reminded of it as I go about my days in America. An old Japanese lady said something to the effect that Americans felt their opinions were facts. She was absolutely right, though she certainly would have gone further in expanding on that had she known Americans even better.
One of my frustrations as someone who was repatriated after 23 years of life abroad has been the limited scope of most American lives. Not only do they tend to live in little bubbles existences, and this applies even when they travel for tourism, but they are absolutely certain that their limited worldview is the only correct one and that it is a very informed one at that. I have had more than one discussion with an American in which a person has asserted that "we don't know" something to be true when the truth is that he or she does not know something to be true because that information has not penetrated the bubble they've constructed around them. The attitude is often, 'if I don't know, it is not true or known by anyone.'
It has been equally the case that I have encountered people who apply the same arrogant assertions to many other situations. If I can't do it, then it can't be done by the average person. If I haven't experienced it, it does not happen. If I don't believe it, it does not exist. Even if someone has indeed done it, they immediately deny the veracity of the claim or they insist it is an outlier experience and therefore invalid as a general rule.
My most recent experience with this involved an exchange with a woman in an LDR who insisted that the parents of young folks in distance relationships couldn't understand how they could work because, when those old people grew up, they lacked the "tools" to conduct such a relationship. Since I had my relationship in 1987, I took issue with the idea that such tools were indeed insufficient to carry on such relationships. She snarkily insisted that she was right and asserted that she was just 'being real' by saying that people could not conduct LDRs without the benefits of instantaneous text communication and video chatting. That was what was "real". My experience was obviously an outlier because she couldn't imagine making a relationship work with the limits that I did. Her experience was the arbiter of "reality," and my experience bounced right off of her bubble rather than find its way in and become part of a new version of truth.
This attitude stunned me because she was adopting the exact same posture as all of the doubters who sit in judgment of LDRs. For them, they believe that an LDR can't be "real" because it is a requirement that you be in person. When they say distance relationships don't work, I'm sure they feel they are also "being real" by setting the bar at needing physical proximity because they couldn't have a relationship any other way. She set a bar as well. Hers was just having access to technology. She even said that she and her boyfriend could not have their LDR without those things. I wonder if this is an opinion that she has shared with her boyfriend. Hopefully, they are on the same page in this regard or someone could end up getting hurt.
I'm sure that the reason she got a bit uppity with me was that I said all that was necessary was commitment and dedication. The tools help, but ultimately I said that it was about what you put into it, not how you carried through with it. This idea was likely threatening to someone who felt her LDR would fail without the comforts and immediacy of all that cell phones and internet connections bring. She probably felt I was questioning her dedication and commitment, but the truth was that she was the one questioning it as a result of what I'd said as I knew nothing about her relationship until she made her assertions. If she couldn't make her relationship work without her necessary tools, then no one could... except for me, that freak outlier. It was that American attitude I've grow so tired of encountering rearing its head again.
People who were born before me suffered far greater difficulties of separation than I did in my LDR. Men went off to war and left their families behind. Their wives still loved them and they wrote very infrequently and constantly faced the threat of permanent loss. Diplomats and political figures traveled during times when sea voyages were common. John Adams adored his wife Abigail, but they endured huge separations—sometimes spanning over a year—as a result of his career. Love somehow maintained itself despite enormous obstacles and relationships remained intact. That is what I'm talking about when I say that it takes devotion and commitment and is not dependent on the tools at your disposal. It's about a shared perspective that you have a connection and do whatever you can to maintain it, not about how you do it.
I wouldn't recommend that anyone pursue an LDR lightly and I certainly wouldn't recommend ignoring every possible tool at ones disposal to ease the difficulty. However, I will say that, if you can't have the relationship without a particular type of communication, then it's time to think about what your relationship is all about. Absence is supposed to make the heart grow fonder, not make it grow bored, cool-hearted, and restless.
Perhaps this is an "evolution" of relationships based on the modern age. That's the same age that has dramatically reduced our attention spans and decreased our distress tolerance until we've all turned into stimulation junkies who can't bear any deviation from our expectations. It's what has us following Twitter and screaming at a barista who puts one too few squirts in our vanilla latte. Perhaps I was a freak outlier, but I have some confidence that some people are made of similarly devoted stuff when it comes to their LDRs, though I'm guess that "being real" girl is not among them.
Saturday, May 16, 2015
Correspondence July 4, 1987 (greeting card)
The fact that I was writing T a greeting card on a national holiday reflected two things. One was my as-yet-unspoken crush on him. The other was the fact that I worked my 24-hour shift at the halfway house on Friday and came home early Saturday morning and picked up the mail I'd missed during my work-induced absence. It was becoming more common to find his tapes each Saturday and to spend the day—a day that often followed a sleep-deprived night—listening and taking notes.
As always, click on the image to load a larger version that can be read.
Outside of card:
Inside of card:
Transcript of interior:
Dear T,
Answer to your hypothetical question: "How would I, S, feel if for one reason or another you taped and said, 'we're finished.'
Answer: I would be crushed, devastated, and angry as hell. Why? I value your thoughts, opinions, and the "company" I get by spending time with you on tape. Indeed, I have an "emotional attachment" as well as having many "needs being met" by an intelligent, honest, and lovely person. I'll expand on the topic on tape but you'd better not be considering it (I doubt that you are).
Your tapes arrived at an opportune (spelling?) time and I thoroughly enjoyed the first 12 sides (which is as far as I am right at this moment) and will probably enjoy the rest equally.
So far, you're very wrong about things "leveling off" and it becoming "only T!" It's still, "oh wow, tapes from T!"
This is getting disgusting, isn't it? Anyway, you're terrific and I thought I'd tell you so...
Tapes will soon follow.
Very soon!
S
Transcript of back:
Quote from Think by Dr. Robert Anthony: "There is brutality and there is honesty. There is no such thing as brutal honesty."
Just a point to ponder...
*****
One of my "problems" was that I was often too honest or blunt for most people's tastes. That went for saying both positive and negative things. I included the Dr. Robert Anthony quote in reference to this troublesome personality trait of mine, but T was rare in that he wasn't intimidated by my particular brand of honesty.
As always, click on the image to load a larger version that can be read.
Outside of card:
Transcript of interior:
Dear T,
Answer to your hypothetical question: "How would I, S, feel if for one reason or another you taped and said, 'we're finished.'
Answer: I would be crushed, devastated, and angry as hell. Why? I value your thoughts, opinions, and the "company" I get by spending time with you on tape. Indeed, I have an "emotional attachment" as well as having many "needs being met" by an intelligent, honest, and lovely person. I'll expand on the topic on tape but you'd better not be considering it (I doubt that you are).
Your tapes arrived at an opportune (spelling?) time and I thoroughly enjoyed the first 12 sides (which is as far as I am right at this moment) and will probably enjoy the rest equally.
So far, you're very wrong about things "leveling off" and it becoming "only T!" It's still, "oh wow, tapes from T!"
This is getting disgusting, isn't it? Anyway, you're terrific and I thought I'd tell you so...
Tapes will soon follow.
Very soon!
S
Transcript of back:
Quote from Think by Dr. Robert Anthony: "There is brutality and there is honesty. There is no such thing as brutal honesty."
Just a point to ponder...
*****
One of my "problems" was that I was often too honest or blunt for most people's tastes. That went for saying both positive and negative things. I included the Dr. Robert Anthony quote in reference to this troublesome personality trait of mine, but T was rare in that he wasn't intimidated by my particular brand of honesty.
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
Correspondence June 28, 1987 (notes - part 2)
This is the second part of a post about the types of notes that T and I tended to take when we taped each other. The first part is here.
You'll note that there are two sets of numbers on each page. The number in the upper right refers to the page of notes. The number on the left side is a reference to what side of the tapes that he received that he is taking notes on. Five sides are referenced here. That means that he's responding to a package in which he'd received three tapes from me.
Page 5 (of 7):
Page 6 (of 7):
Page 7 (of 7):
*****
Note: T was a very good chess player as a child and still excellent as an adult. The "postal game" that he refers to is a game of chess. I could play a bit, but I didn't know about formal things such as opening moves and known strategies.
If nothing else, these notes should give a good idea of the range of things we discussed. They included myself, T, our mutual pen pals and those who they knew and spoke of, and whatever things we were doing or were holding our interest at the time. One of my friends was flabbergasted that we could talk for hours as we did. It's not that we never ran out of things to say, but rather that it took quite some time before we did so.
You'll note that there are two sets of numbers on each page. The number in the upper right refers to the page of notes. The number on the left side is a reference to what side of the tapes that he received that he is taking notes on. Five sides are referenced here. That means that he's responding to a package in which he'd received three tapes from me.
Page 5 (of 7):
Page 6 (of 7):
Page 7 (of 7):
*****
Note: T was a very good chess player as a child and still excellent as an adult. The "postal game" that he refers to is a game of chess. I could play a bit, but I didn't know about formal things such as opening moves and known strategies.
If nothing else, these notes should give a good idea of the range of things we discussed. They included myself, T, our mutual pen pals and those who they knew and spoke of, and whatever things we were doing or were holding our interest at the time. One of my friends was flabbergasted that we could talk for hours as we did. It's not that we never ran out of things to say, but rather that it took quite some time before we did so.
Monday, May 4, 2015
Correspondence June 28, 1987 (notes - part 1)
With pen pals with whom we had a particular rapport, we often referred to the tapes we received as "marathons". That's because it was often one person talking alone for many hours. For T and me, it was not uncommon for there to be between three and six 90-minute tapes in one package, though he usually sent more than I did as he not only spoke more slowly and with more pauses, but he also was better at asides. I tended to stay more on my "script" or work from notes when I spoke.
The tapes were an attempt on our parts to carry on "conversations" with both distance and time separating us. Distance is something that still can't be solved in LDRs, but modern technology has allowed most people to overcome the issue of time with simultaneous or nearly immediate responses being possible via chat, Skype, or texting. For us, we were lucky if only five days had passed between the last word leaving our lips and the first word being heard by the recipient.
The way in which we attempted to conduct these ersatz conversations was to listen, take notes, and then use those notes to construct our answers. I usually wrote copious pages of notes, including not only what was said that I wanted to comment on, but often notes on what I wanted to say in reply. As I recorded my answers, I would often cross off items then throw away my pages of notes. None of my taping notes survive to this day, but one set of T's do. I still have these because, at one point, we each asked the other to send our notes so that we could get an idea of how we each carried out this particular task. I saved the 7 pages of notes that T took on a set of my tapes (pre-relationship).
It is important to know that tone and context are entirely absent when viewing these notes. Some things were said sarcastically, some as jokes, and some as hypothetical considerations. That's my way of saying not to take too much at what appears on these pages at face value. This is what was jotted down rapidly by someone listening to a young woman from Pennsylvania spout her nonsense for about three hours.
Note: While I usually transcribe written correspondence for clarity, I will not be doing so in this case since the nature of the notes is so erratic. Also, again, you can click on these pictures to load a size that should be readable and you can increase the size of the graphic using your browser's controls if it isn't big enough once the picture is loaded (control plus + on a PC or command plus + on a Mac).
Page 1 (of 7):
Page 2 (of 7):
Page 3 (of 7):
Page 4 (of 7):
Comments of use: "Gene" refers to Gene Simmons of KISS.
The second part of the notes is here.
The tapes were an attempt on our parts to carry on "conversations" with both distance and time separating us. Distance is something that still can't be solved in LDRs, but modern technology has allowed most people to overcome the issue of time with simultaneous or nearly immediate responses being possible via chat, Skype, or texting. For us, we were lucky if only five days had passed between the last word leaving our lips and the first word being heard by the recipient.
The way in which we attempted to conduct these ersatz conversations was to listen, take notes, and then use those notes to construct our answers. I usually wrote copious pages of notes, including not only what was said that I wanted to comment on, but often notes on what I wanted to say in reply. As I recorded my answers, I would often cross off items then throw away my pages of notes. None of my taping notes survive to this day, but one set of T's do. I still have these because, at one point, we each asked the other to send our notes so that we could get an idea of how we each carried out this particular task. I saved the 7 pages of notes that T took on a set of my tapes (pre-relationship).
It is important to know that tone and context are entirely absent when viewing these notes. Some things were said sarcastically, some as jokes, and some as hypothetical considerations. That's my way of saying not to take too much at what appears on these pages at face value. This is what was jotted down rapidly by someone listening to a young woman from Pennsylvania spout her nonsense for about three hours.
Note: While I usually transcribe written correspondence for clarity, I will not be doing so in this case since the nature of the notes is so erratic. Also, again, you can click on these pictures to load a size that should be readable and you can increase the size of the graphic using your browser's controls if it isn't big enough once the picture is loaded (control plus + on a PC or command plus + on a Mac).
Page 1 (of 7):
Page 2 (of 7):
Page 3 (of 7):
Page 4 (of 7):
Comments of use: "Gene" refers to Gene Simmons of KISS.
The second part of the notes is here.
Saturday, May 2, 2015
Correspondence June 17, 1987 (cassette tape)
On this tape, I do something which was very common for our network of pen friends to do. I inform him a bit about my personal history. With my mothers noisy dog barking at me for attention and her even noisier bird banging on its cage and shrieking in the background, I did my best to let him know who I was at that moment by telling him more about who I once was.
Select transcript June 17, 1987:
As far as me as a child, I can remember certain things, but I don't have a great deal of memory of my childhood. I don't think anybody has a real vivid memory. I remember always having my sister around and me always wanting to do things and her never wanting to do anything. I always wanted to play. My sister never wanted to play anything. I wished I had a sister who wanted to play with me so I always turned to my cousins, but there wasn't a good situation with my cousins either. That's also a story unto itself. It's hard to explain all of the inter-relationships. I can remember that always happening... that I would always wanted to do things and (my sister) wouldn't.
As far as in school, I got D's in first grade. I did not do well in second or third grade as far as grades went. In fourth grade, I started to pull straight A's. In fifth and sixth, I started to vacillate a little bit and get B's and C's. Then, in 7th and 8th, I got A's and B's. And then 9th through the rest of school, I got straight A's and did real well. I don't understand why my performance wavered, but the funny is that I always used to feel that I was stupid and then got intelligent. It was really weird.
I would not know what was going on and then a door would open and I would understand everything. First, second, third grade, I thought I was really dumb and I couldn't understand things. Math, in second grade, geez, the math teacher hated me because I was so damn dumb that I couldn't get anything. I remember on multiple occasions her trying to make me understand and it never quite getting through. Then, in fourth grade, it was like "bang, bang, bang", it all made sense. It was like it took my brain up until fourth grade to develop any abstract thinking at all. In fourth grade, it was all clear. In fifth to sixth grade, again, it sort of dropped off then 7th it all came back.
In 7th and 8th grade, once more, it went away. In 9th, it came back. It never went away after 9th, by the way. Then, it was okay. I can remember these spurts of growth and (not having) intellectual growth. I remember never having it clear for awhile and then it just all of sudden being crystal and I don't understand that about myself, but it happened enough times that I don't know. I used to think I was really dumb though. Now I know better, but I used to think I was really stupid, especially when I was very young.
As far as social relationships throughout my childhood, I was a very thin child in first grade. I was really skinny and scrawny, but in second... from second grade on, I was very overweight and, as you know, there's a lot of abuse from other children for that. I can never remember a time more or less of not being overweight. By the time I was up to 305 lbs., which was my peak weight, which is the weight that I was at for a long time, through much of my last two years of high school. In my last two years of high school, I weighed over 300 pounds, and through my first three years of college, I did, too. It reached the point where I didn't even feel like a person. I felt like a creature and I didn't feel like a human being.
You asked me some questions about that. How did I change? Well, I feel like a person now whereas before I felt like I wasn't even human and I (now) deserve to be treated like a human because, for so many years, I was treated as less than worthwhile. People snicker and they make jokes. They always torment you and taunt you and I can never remember a time in my life when that didn't happen prior to my transition.* I never, ever felt like I was an attractive person. I tried to convince myself that there were certain parts of me that were rather attractive, but I could never delude myself to that point. I always was thinking, "Some day, I'll do this or that, or whatever," and I never did it as far as losing weight. I want to find the questions that you asked me specifically so I can address that.
What I wanted to tell was that, you have to consider that there's a lot of emotions that go along with being the weight that anybody is at when they're severely obese. You have a lot of anger at the people who are taunting you and anger at yourself for not controlling the problem. You have a lot of self-hate and a lot of hate toward the people who are bothering you. There's a lot of negative things and one of the things that I found when I show people that this is what I used to look like, they say that you looked a lot less happy than you do now.
A lot of that dissipated, but not completely. I still hate to see anybody judged on appearance. I hate it with a complete passion. It bothers the hell out of me. I really resent that you asked me my height and weight. For me, it's enough that I sent two full length, full body pictures. What more do you want? I'm not going to tell you my weight! It's none of your damn business. If you can't tell what I supposedly look like from two pictures that show me in my entirety except for my feet, I'm going to tell you! It's none of your business!
I hate talking about this, by the way. You said, do I feel comfortable. It's not a matter of comfort. It's a matter of hating to, but doing it anyway because there are reasons why which I'll go into later on.
*****
*This "transition" refers to dramatic weight loss. I'd lost about 140 lbs. by the time I started corresponding with T.
*****
I had sent T two photos of me in my second correspondence to him. Those pictures were me prior to weight loss and after weight loss. I didn't want to show him the "old" me, but I felt that I had to in order to be emotionally transparent and to avoid talking around certain topics. I had fallen in love with him, and I didn't want him to see what I used to look like because I was afraid that it would convince him stop corresponding to me altogether. Fortunately, it did not stop him.
Friday, May 1, 2015
Putting the "Relationship" in "Long Distance Relationship"
One of the things that I consistently encounter when people talk about their LDRs is that they seem to forget that they aren't just "long distance", but also in "relationships". The same issues that concern a face-to-face relationship affect a distance one as well. It seems that the logistical challenges and physical deprivation overwhelm the thoughts of other relationship concerns for some people.
However, there are other issues other than resolving distance and coping with the day-to-day sense of feeling alone. Unsurprisingly, I follow the Reddit LDR subreddit that I link to on the right. I do this because I want to get a sense of the challenges and issues people presently face as compared to my LDR back in 1987-88 as well as see it as a muse for further work on my book. I've noticed that people often fall in love and then think about how to get through the separation without worrying about bigger problems such as basic compatibility issues or lifestyle differences.
One of the threads that I was looking at was from a young woman who was of a certain faith that did not allow followers of said faith to marry atheists. She was neither prepared to abandon her religion nor was he ready to convert to her faith. The distance wasn't even the issue in this case. It was this basic roadblock to any sort of future together. Her question was about whether or not it was "worth" it for him to endure the LDR given their obstacles, but it wouldn't be "worth" it even if they were in person. It was a road to nowhere in terms of a relationship given their respective stances on this issue.
The very basics of conducting an LDR include the fact that it has to be more firmly "book-ended" than a regular relationship. That is, it has a concrete beginning in which intent to enter into a relationship is understood by both parties and a concrete conclusion in which the distance has been closed is planned. Because of the sacrifices that must be made in order to be together, it becomes even more important for the parties in an LDR to have some sense that the entire relationship has the potential to work out.
It's monumentally unfair to the party who abandons life in one location to move to another only to find that their significant other has fundamental differences and now the relationship just won't work out despite now being in person. Before anyone moves, the relationship itself has to be solid and a plan for a shared future has to be agreed upon. If love were a neat and tidy thing and we could control who we fall in love with, it would be ideal that people wouldn't even fall in love with someone who had an enormous roadblock to future togetherness and such relationships wouldn't start in the first place. Love is not so logical or cooperative, so it's important to look at a distance situation first and foremost as a relationship rather than to focus too much on the "distance" portion.
However, there are other issues other than resolving distance and coping with the day-to-day sense of feeling alone. Unsurprisingly, I follow the Reddit LDR subreddit that I link to on the right. I do this because I want to get a sense of the challenges and issues people presently face as compared to my LDR back in 1987-88 as well as see it as a muse for further work on my book. I've noticed that people often fall in love and then think about how to get through the separation without worrying about bigger problems such as basic compatibility issues or lifestyle differences.
One of the threads that I was looking at was from a young woman who was of a certain faith that did not allow followers of said faith to marry atheists. She was neither prepared to abandon her religion nor was he ready to convert to her faith. The distance wasn't even the issue in this case. It was this basic roadblock to any sort of future together. Her question was about whether or not it was "worth" it for him to endure the LDR given their obstacles, but it wouldn't be "worth" it even if they were in person. It was a road to nowhere in terms of a relationship given their respective stances on this issue.
The very basics of conducting an LDR include the fact that it has to be more firmly "book-ended" than a regular relationship. That is, it has a concrete beginning in which intent to enter into a relationship is understood by both parties and a concrete conclusion in which the distance has been closed is planned. Because of the sacrifices that must be made in order to be together, it becomes even more important for the parties in an LDR to have some sense that the entire relationship has the potential to work out.
It's monumentally unfair to the party who abandons life in one location to move to another only to find that their significant other has fundamental differences and now the relationship just won't work out despite now being in person. Before anyone moves, the relationship itself has to be solid and a plan for a shared future has to be agreed upon. If love were a neat and tidy thing and we could control who we fall in love with, it would be ideal that people wouldn't even fall in love with someone who had an enormous roadblock to future togetherness and such relationships wouldn't start in the first place. Love is not so logical or cooperative, so it's important to look at a distance situation first and foremost as a relationship rather than to focus too much on the "distance" portion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)