Let's set aside the obnoxious old saw that it takes more muscles to frown than smile and admit that, in situations that are frustrating or unpleasant, the path of least resistance is to be awful. It's a hard thing to admit and most of us have the blinders on when it comes to our own tendency to be ungracious, but it's true and human and something that requires vigilance instead of denial.
The past few weeks at work have been particularly hellacious, an impossible numbers game wherein hundreds of people descend on our five-person operation with everything they own and, owing to a poor understanding of geometry, physics, and the notion that the world doesn't revolve around them, become enraged to find that we can't fit the astonishing pile of consumer goods they've deemed necessary for a weekend getaway on a boat immediately.
Look, I'm no angel where this is concerned. No one ever thinks they're the one being unreasonable, and I'd like to imagine that I can claim the high road. Realistically, though, it takes an extraordinary amount of energy not to trade snark for snark, raised voice for raised voice, veiled insult for veiled insult. I try. Really hard. But while I'm mostly successful in not shooting first, I struggle not to fire back in kind and when I dig in for a fight, I am not fun.
That said, being on the receiving end of these shenanigans and being responsible for young seasonal employees who are still learning the operation but who are smart, courteous, and hard-working, and watching bitter hags having a bad day just eviscerate these kids makes me realize what a lot of assholes there are in this world. And now that I'm more conscious of it, I see it everywhere that customer service happens: in stores, at the movies, in restaurants...Ev. Ery. Where. Customers are awful, entitled know-it-alls. Sure, sure, there are times when things are legitimately bad and someone needs to do a better job, but just look around and see how often someone in a line near you goes from 0 to subhuman because a grocery clerk needs a price check or won't accept their Canadian currency or asks them to wait a moment while they put out the fire that's just erupted in the trash can.
So the thing is, it takes a little bit of decorum, a little bit of restraint to overcome the junkfood-style satisfaction of being awful in the moment but it's well worth it because in the long run it's kind of soul-crushing. Or it should be, if you're even kind of a good person.
Am I a broken record? Maybe. But if the easiest way to be is awful, it's worth reminding myself and others to be diligent about NOT being so as often as possible.
It's 4 a.m. and I'm about to go to work. Today I will behave as though every customer is an alien new to earth and in need of guidance. Today I will muster an appreciative laugh for lame jokes just to honor the spirit of positivity. Today I'm bringing cupcakes to work just because.
Ready? Go!
I've recently converted to being happy. You're welcome to ride along. It should be a glorious train wreck.
Showing posts with label love. Show all posts
Showing posts with label love. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Monday, June 27, 2011
Marriage Ain't the Only Game in Town
Marriage is in the air. If you're into wedding extravaganzas of the traditional variety, June is a month more or less synonymous with these blessed events (which, given the weather is okay if you're getting hitched in a church and partying in the ballroom at the Ramada,...for the married-oceanside-under-the-great-blue-sky set, it's a recipe for disaster). More recently and specifically, the legalization of gay union in the state of New York has put everyone in a matrimonial state of mind. I've spent a lot of time thinking about marriage.
I've spent so much time thinking about it, that I think this is going to have to be a multi-post discussion. Here's part the first: Marriage Ain't the Only Game in Town (some thoughts on our collective obsession with the ring). Coming soon to a blog near you: Red Herrings and Elephants in the Room (Legalizing gay marriage has nothing to do with marriage: discuss). And finally: Both Sides Now (well, you'll see). Without further ado:
A couple of weeks ago, a childhood friend of mine whose blog I like very much, despite what I suspect is a very wide divide between our worldviews and experiences since the days when we built impromptu boats explored abandoned buildings, wrote a piece about "happily ever after." In it, she laments that the popular imagination is enthralled with stories of courtship, but usually loses interest once the happy couple walks off into the sunset, and we rarely get to see what happens on that stroll. The gist of it is that although it's a lot less sexy to think about the ups and downs of a long-term commitment, THAT journey deserves celebration as much or more so than the happy "how we met" horseshit that most people are excited about.
I'm with her, as far as that goes. As pretty much anyone who's every interacted with other human beings, platonically or romantically, knows, infatuation is easy, but the kind of dedication, patience and, yes, love required to make a relationship work over time is exceptionally demanding and sometimes really not that fun at all. I'll suggest that it takes a lifetime of hard work just to understand, accept and appreciate our forever-changing selves. That anyone manages to do the same for and with another person is nothing short of miraculous. Raise the roof for any couple with the emotional largess to navigate time and space together for great length of time.
Where I part ways with my friend, however, is where she equates this kind of commitment exclusively with marriage. She values marriage so highly that she places cohabitation outside of marriage alongside the escalating divorce rate as lamentable conditions undermining meaningful long-term commitments. This drives me bonkers on just about a million levels. Here are some:
We are a culture that loves the narrative of marriage as a rite of passage. For most young Americans, whether their plans for the future involve being an astronaut or a firefighter or a secretary or a ditchdigger, the plan for their personal lives is obvious: meet someone, fall in love and get married. The subtext is that this is what people do when they're grown ups. The tandem assumption (although the stigma has certainly lessened over time) is that if you don't do this, or if you divorce, you are some combination of lazy, immature, unserious, and/or morally bankrupt. I would posit, however, that the real heart of the problem is not careless, unconsidered divorce, but careless, unconsidered marriage.
If getting married is the last piece of your relationship puzzle and both parties share a vision of what that means, great. If remaining unmarried floats your boat, great. The bottom line is that we as a society benefit from happy, thoughtful people cultivating happy, thoughtful relationships (particularly is there's a shared vision of children in those relationships) and that's not something that happens because of elaborate traditional ceremonies or legal contracts. It happens when people make reasoned decisions about their life together and build that life on a foundation of trust, respect, and love.
I've spent so much time thinking about it, that I think this is going to have to be a multi-post discussion. Here's part the first: Marriage Ain't the Only Game in Town (some thoughts on our collective obsession with the ring). Coming soon to a blog near you: Red Herrings and Elephants in the Room (Legalizing gay marriage has nothing to do with marriage: discuss). And finally: Both Sides Now (well, you'll see). Without further ado:
A couple of weeks ago, a childhood friend of mine whose blog I like very much, despite what I suspect is a very wide divide between our worldviews and experiences since the days when we built impromptu boats explored abandoned buildings, wrote a piece about "happily ever after." In it, she laments that the popular imagination is enthralled with stories of courtship, but usually loses interest once the happy couple walks off into the sunset, and we rarely get to see what happens on that stroll. The gist of it is that although it's a lot less sexy to think about the ups and downs of a long-term commitment, THAT journey deserves celebration as much or more so than the happy "how we met" horseshit that most people are excited about.
I'm with her, as far as that goes. As pretty much anyone who's every interacted with other human beings, platonically or romantically, knows, infatuation is easy, but the kind of dedication, patience and, yes, love required to make a relationship work over time is exceptionally demanding and sometimes really not that fun at all. I'll suggest that it takes a lifetime of hard work just to understand, accept and appreciate our forever-changing selves. That anyone manages to do the same for and with another person is nothing short of miraculous. Raise the roof for any couple with the emotional largess to navigate time and space together for great length of time.
Where I part ways with my friend, however, is where she equates this kind of commitment exclusively with marriage. She values marriage so highly that she places cohabitation outside of marriage alongside the escalating divorce rate as lamentable conditions undermining meaningful long-term commitments. This drives me bonkers on just about a million levels. Here are some:
- As I noted in the comments section of her post, there are plenty of people who exemplify the most virtuous behaviors attributed to government-legitimized couples who are either legally excluded from or voluntarily opt out of that institution. Let's leave aside for a moment the sometimes superhuman effort demanded of gay couples who've had to negotiate their long-term relationships not just on a personal level, but on a public, political level as well (activist or not, being in an open gay relationship still reads as a bold statement to much of the public at large).
- I can cite dozens of instances where people previously married have moved on since their divorce with a new partner -- one they haven't married. More notably, they have no intention of marrying again, but these relationships have, by and large, outlasted the ones in which they pledged "'til death do us part."
- At the risk of reading too much into it, there's a subtle implication here that somehow the public proclamation of commitment is what makes it valid. In other words, it's insufficient to have a monogamous, mutually satisfying, long-term relationship. It's just playing house until you've laid your heart's intimate depths open for public acknowledgement and judgment.
We are a culture that loves the narrative of marriage as a rite of passage. For most young Americans, whether their plans for the future involve being an astronaut or a firefighter or a secretary or a ditchdigger, the plan for their personal lives is obvious: meet someone, fall in love and get married. The subtext is that this is what people do when they're grown ups. The tandem assumption (although the stigma has certainly lessened over time) is that if you don't do this, or if you divorce, you are some combination of lazy, immature, unserious, and/or morally bankrupt. I would posit, however, that the real heart of the problem is not careless, unconsidered divorce, but careless, unconsidered marriage.
If getting married is the last piece of your relationship puzzle and both parties share a vision of what that means, great. If remaining unmarried floats your boat, great. The bottom line is that we as a society benefit from happy, thoughtful people cultivating happy, thoughtful relationships (particularly is there's a shared vision of children in those relationships) and that's not something that happens because of elaborate traditional ceremonies or legal contracts. It happens when people make reasoned decisions about their life together and build that life on a foundation of trust, respect, and love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)