Righteous Indignation

When the flames of passion are ignited for a cause not your own, you can be assured that evolution is on your side. 'In-group' thinking has many components that together allow for a cohesive and functional group. Someone considering actions or thoughts not in line with consensus is subjected to mocking or economic or physical punishment to enforce compliance. The compliance is two-fold, that of the individual in question and that of the remainder of the group who sees what happened to the first person and derives the appropriate lesson. But evolution added a critical feature: righteous indignation. By firing up an adverse reaction to non-compliance or 'illegal' activity, members of the group are driven to react in a manner that will attempt to enforce societies rules whether physically, or by reporting the offense, or by jeering the person with feelings of contempt. And so society can have its checks and balances and the social order preserved. Those individually who had a propensity to function within those effective means of social order were more likely to survive (with all the benefits afforded by group living) and pass their genes on.

So I spoke with a Righteous Indignator last night who 'lost respect' for me because of how I treated my best friend by going out with his ex-girlfriend shortly after their break up. Her role here: None. Yet she felt it was her place to not only feel passionately offended but moved to the point of expressing those denigrating thoughts to me concerning what she considered inappropriate behavior for friends or a group. I listened to her piece, told her she has a right to her opinion, that my life is not meant to be judged by the court of public opinion. She couldn't process any of my explanations for mitigating circumstances so I abruptly said that I just don't really care what others think or that she lost respect, it's not her business.

Modern society allows much more fluidity such that the consequences for defecting from the group-think is much lower. If I don't like this group or community, I can withdraw or leave or even find different friends. And while there is a lot of value I recognize and obtain by being in the group, I have an independent streak that will not be silenced.

But what ever you do, don't repeat anything I just wrote! In the immortal words of Ahmed the dead terrrorist: Silence! I kill you!

The Code

Apparently there exists a CODE, immutable and inviolable. The penalty for its transgression is ostracism, scorn, and perhaps a black eye. The code to which I refer is, 'Thou shall not covet thy best friends EX-girlfriend'. It is of this I write today and let the pieces fall where they may.

What an awkward situation. Over the past few weeks my Bud had detailed to me the troubles in his relationship and how his woman, Cassi, has been at odds with him, pushing for a different level of interaction than he believed he was already providing. She finally ended their few-month relationship.

A VERY short time later I asked her to join me at a club just to get out and have some fun. I had no intentions for anything more, nor did she. We talked extensively about many areas of common interests. As the night progressed and the music held sway, our eyes locked. Unexpected and unintentional though it was, it was, nonetheless, captivating.

Now what? How do I break it to Bud? Obviously he would have liked to continue with Cassi but she didn't feel they were meant for each other (and he didn't seem too upset about it). And what of the Code??? I thought for about a week and could not think of any gentle way to tell him without hurting his feelings but, of course, within a week he found out anyway. He was PISSED to say the least and told me we couldn't be friends if I act this way.

What could I do? Give up a decade of friendship? Risk losing a life partner or was she just another passing fancy? Not an easy call.

So I went to Cassi's house that evening and told her the timing was wrong and a long-term relationship with the intent on merging our families impossible. I couldn't believe that she started to cry, which was odd because we went out twice over the span of only one week. I felt horrible that she became so attached and I know if I had gone out with her a while longer I would have as well. Then I patched things up with Bud but in the end there were no winners here. Cassi won't speak to me or Bud, Bud's feelings trampled, I lost a girlfriend, friends of friends somehow got dragged into things and others don't speak with each other anymore. YIKES, with great power comes great responsibility!

Some unresolved thoughts on the matter revolve around considering a buddy's feeling but at the same time recognizing that he is no longer a contender for a relationship with this woman. Why is it OK for another man to ask her out and have a chance at love but by virtue of my friendship, I am penalized? Does any person have the right to dictate to another who they can or can not date? Obviously, if he was still courting her, pining away for her, or their situation not clearly delineated to the point where it was clear that at least one party was not interested, then of course, no one would sanction a cock-block. But once it is clear that the relationship is over, anyone should be free to date her.

If the situation was reversed and I was put out to pasture, I would obviously mourn my lost opportunity but I would not begrudge him the right to find happiness. Yes, it would hurt but better a good friend of mine than some dumb loser. I would have put aside my petty jealousy or insecurity for his happiness.

Post divorce, with children, increasing in years, limits the pool of datable women. Invariably, we are going to overlap in this area. Further limiting that pool based on some code is ridiculous. Does dating someone somehow confer the right to have ANY say in her future relations or mine, for that matter? To some it does. I don't necessarily agree and every situation must be evaluated on its own merit. What if that fateful evening occurred 2 months, 6 months, one year later? Does that change the rules? How long is acceptable time to wait before asking out a buddy's ex-girlfriend? Is there anytime? Should one have to ask permission? What about here, where it just happened and wasn't even planned? What about if the same thing occurred 6 months or a year henceforth? Would it make a difference if they were going out for a long time? If he had been in love with her? If he had mentioned that he intended to win her back?

I know I'm playing with fire expressing these thoughts so I caution you all to please, remember, during this holiday season, to put the EX back in Xmas.

Check out a great set of articles (17+) at the Nondating Life blog about dating.

Beyond A Doubt

-"Halacha course canceled due to lack of interest."

That was the shocking yet vaguely amusing announcement we heard over the PA. It was my Junior year in an orthodox day school in what is now a very frum community. Apparently some administrator took it upon himself to actually consider areas of student interest, or disinterest for that matter, even to the point of sidelining a hallmark of Jewish education. Obviously, it is imperative for a religious student to absorb the tenants of the faith or in the very least be aware of the rules which he is breaking. It's somehow more fun that way. But that year was to be robbed of its mischievous transgressions. If we didn't know the laws, we couldn't be guilty of violating them nor would we have the temptation to do so in the first place. Shlomo Auslander has a great related article (Hat tip:NJG).

But what is it about Halacha that seemed so useless to our school yet always served me well in cure of insomnia or as a coaster? For all of you who heard about halacha but never got to read from the text, the answer is this. It's just page after page of dry, boring facts that requires an equivalent of a law degree to become proficient. At the time, I just shrugged and said, "Great!"

But I have come to appreciate the significance behind that moment, even more so lately. I guess I had gotten used to years worth of technical educational manuals that I had forgotten what it was like to learn about life through the fictional escapades of others. Much more illuminating and better retained are the gleaned words of wisdom or useful insights from stories, in the context of an enjoyable parable rather than from dry lists.

I recently listened to the book-on-tape, The Salmon Of Doubt, compiled from Douglas Adam's writings. One 2-page story, entitled "Cookies," made a great impression upon me. Go to your library and read in the real book page 150-1 for the full flavor. Should you proceed here further, you can save a quarter on inter-library loan because I do reveal the punch line. In brief, he was sitting at a table waiting for a train with his package of cookies, coffee and a newspaper. Opposite him was a businessman who proceeded to open the package of cookies and eat one of the cookies! Douglas said nothing but ate the next of his cookies and then the man ate the following. Douglas was upset but didn't know how to deal with this affront. His tension was building as was his righteous indignation. When the package was finished the man walked off. He then looked under his paper and found his own sealed package of cookies beneath his paper. He had been eating the other man's cookies all along while that man quietly suffered the infraction!

Douglas had been so sure of his take on what was happening, considered rebuking the man, was horrified and yet resigned to refrain from confrontation. His reality during those moments seemed as clear to him as anything else he would bet his life on but one little itty bitty fact was missing and that changed the entire meaning and context of his exchange. Could there really exist another perspective?

My friend complained to me recently about the character of another friend's wife pointing to the fact that she never sent a thank you card to him for a wedding gift sent 10 years ago. First off, I was surprised he remembered who sent him thank you cards and that he could hold a grudge so long. Secondly, I told him Douglas' story and asked him to consider if his gift was lost in the mail, or her thank you card was lost as well. Perhaps, the husband had agreed to write it and failed to do so thus absolving the wife. I asked him to take a step back and consider there might be alternate realities than the one he felt so grounded in. It's a lesson that could be summed up in a book of facts as "Don't jump to conclusions or off cliffs for that matter" or "Things may not be as they seem on the surface unless you're actually on the surface" or "Don't judge a book by its cover unless its pornography" but in the absence a very telling context they are just neat sayings that are so passe. Instead, Douglas Adams succeeded in forever implanting his insight into my mind in a way no dry text could ever. So drop your textbooks and pass me a trashy novel.

Please feel free to share your own stories about some faux paxs based on the third person omniscient, "If our hero had only known..."