I have encountered this particular phenomenon many a time during the course of my dating experience. The interaction starts of fairly benign, talking about each others' lives, interests, beliefs, experiences, what have you. Then the date planning gets under way, it's about the logistics and sorting out the "what," "where," and "when." Inevitably, there are some hiccups along the way. Either the time(s) I mention I am available don't work, or something comes up before the date.
Then comes the moment of truth; does she make a counteroffer?
Whether or not you think about it, there is subtle communication in this little gesture, or lack thereof. A counteroffer communicates interest, a desire to spend time together -if only to get to know the other person. Lack of a counteroffer communicates -for whatever reason -that she's not very interested in meeting, dating, or spending time together.
It can even communicate that she's actually uninterested in dating altogether -and even impact my interest. I had a first date with a lovely young woman once, and followed it up by asking her out on a second date no less than three times. Invariably, all three times she said she was busy for one reason or another, but she made absolutely no counteroffer on any of these occasions. While it could be perceived as legitimate reasons to have been unavailable, after that many attempts without her showing interest or offering to reschedule, I was done.
Feb 24, 2014
Jan 2, 2014
Halachic Prenup from the Inside Out
As I read the recent Commentator article advocating for Halachic Prenups, I had a number of thoughts and some very conflicted feelings.
On the one hand, I get the point. Part of the advocacy is starting a movement, creating general practice. Of course it meets with resistance (as most major changes do) and the article is addressing said resistance. Some of the (counter)points rubbed me the wrong way, though. Which -as per usual -got me thinking.
I happen to generally be in favor of granting leverage over people who are abusing power as is the case in withholding a get. In fact, I have brokered a number of Halachic Prenups with couples who have had all kinds of challenges and tensions broaching, considering, and working through the process.
Let me emphasize that point: IT IS A PROCESS. Not something that should be expected to easily or simply be "taken care of" or "required" like paperwork. Most of the Halachic Prenups I have had to broker have been with couples who may have brought up the topic once or twice and then two weeks before the wedding began actually working through it. Bringing it up evokes fears, insecurities, and even blame in both men and women.
I want to make a brief but powerful distinction in how I am considering the Halachic Prenup in contrast to the article. I am considering the interpersonal, relationship-oriented perspective of what it is like to consider the Halachic Prenup from my view as a man (and experience with couples). The author of the article was making points and putting forth arguments for leaders of Jewish communities, considering the broader impact and goals of the Halachic Prenup. I agree with that view in principle, and I am considering the complex set of feelings and implications of a couple actually facing the possibility, with all the fears, insecurities, implications, and reactions that may come up. The way I see it, making a global argument to a couple in crisis over the feelings and reactions evoked (as I have faced several times with couples) is not particularly helpful in that moment.
As a quick (and perhaps dirty) comparison, consider what it may feel like for a woman who gets engaged and the groom suggests or demands a financial prenuptial agreement. Whatever the reason, it may certainly evoke strong feelings, questioning the man's trust in her, feeling that he is looking towards the end rather than being in the relationship. There are many, many differences between financial and Halachic Prenups, but the point here is that they share some similarities and may thus evoke similar feelings.
I certainly admit to having understood a man feeling that way when his fiance demanded he sign a Halachic Prenup. I can admit to considering how I would think if I were in his shoes myself, and have experienced that same feeling myself.
Some points that came to mind (and then I will consider them more in depth):
1) It communicates strong feelings, which may include fear, anxiety, and insecurity while advocating addressing those feelings by requesting a contract from the other person.
It is form a vulnerability, the potential of being stuck. Hearing stories and knowing others who are chained can sow insecurity and doubt. Not unfounded doubt, the possibility is certainly present. While presenting a Halachic Prenup may provide a security, it is addressing the concern with a request/demand on the partner. From my own perspective, I dislike the idea of addressing feelings by placing a contract on the other person as a general rule, especially with a spouse. I know it can be very helpful in this instance, though I dislike that it may communicate "this is the way to deal with relationship issues."
I acknowledge there are certainly more than feelings at stake, which leads me to point #2...
2) There is a small (or not so small) part of requesting/suggesting/demanding a Halachic Prenup which communicates that the man (or woman) is capable or even likely to withhold (reject) a get.
The issue in point #2 is that it constitutes a breach of trust in the relationship. Like insurance, it may be considered a policy for safety, but the need for such a policy means there is a risk. The risk here is between two people, i.e. how they treat one another, which implies that one (in particular often the man) is the risk factor. It can even feel accusatory, particularly for a man who would not consider himself or his relationship at risk of getting to that point. Being the risk factor is certainly hard to hear, and may be construed as (pre)blame. I believe that breach is both mend-able and even strengthens a relationship when effectively addressed.
3) This Halachic Prenup is about other men/women, about agunot. Not about You/Me/Us.
This message is both prevalent in the article and one of the most used arguments when met with resistance. First, I have to say it is the worst way to try and convince a partner to accept a Halachic Prenup. Second, I believe it actually subverts the interpersonal or relationship concerns, which include insecurity and trust.
I am a stubborn believer in being prepared and working together in relationships and especially in marriage. To me, that is likely to include having very difficult conversations about raising children, financial issues, and Halachic concerns -both concerning (a) working towards staying together and (b) the unpleasant possibility that we split up. I still believe in it, I plan on having those conversations -including the Halachic Prenup and working through it with whomever I end up with.
On the one hand, I get the point. Part of the advocacy is starting a movement, creating general practice. Of course it meets with resistance (as most major changes do) and the article is addressing said resistance. Some of the (counter)points rubbed me the wrong way, though. Which -as per usual -got me thinking.
I happen to generally be in favor of granting leverage over people who are abusing power as is the case in withholding a get. In fact, I have brokered a number of Halachic Prenups with couples who have had all kinds of challenges and tensions broaching, considering, and working through the process.
Let me emphasize that point: IT IS A PROCESS. Not something that should be expected to easily or simply be "taken care of" or "required" like paperwork. Most of the Halachic Prenups I have had to broker have been with couples who may have brought up the topic once or twice and then two weeks before the wedding began actually working through it. Bringing it up evokes fears, insecurities, and even blame in both men and women.
I want to make a brief but powerful distinction in how I am considering the Halachic Prenup in contrast to the article. I am considering the interpersonal, relationship-oriented perspective of what it is like to consider the Halachic Prenup from my view as a man (and experience with couples). The author of the article was making points and putting forth arguments for leaders of Jewish communities, considering the broader impact and goals of the Halachic Prenup. I agree with that view in principle, and I am considering the complex set of feelings and implications of a couple actually facing the possibility, with all the fears, insecurities, implications, and reactions that may come up. The way I see it, making a global argument to a couple in crisis over the feelings and reactions evoked (as I have faced several times with couples) is not particularly helpful in that moment.
As a quick (and perhaps dirty) comparison, consider what it may feel like for a woman who gets engaged and the groom suggests or demands a financial prenuptial agreement. Whatever the reason, it may certainly evoke strong feelings, questioning the man's trust in her, feeling that he is looking towards the end rather than being in the relationship. There are many, many differences between financial and Halachic Prenups, but the point here is that they share some similarities and may thus evoke similar feelings.
I certainly admit to having understood a man feeling that way when his fiance demanded he sign a Halachic Prenup. I can admit to considering how I would think if I were in his shoes myself, and have experienced that same feeling myself.
Some points that came to mind (and then I will consider them more in depth):
1) It communicates strong feelings, which may include fear, anxiety, and insecurity while advocating addressing those feelings by requesting a contract from the other person.
It is form a vulnerability, the potential of being stuck. Hearing stories and knowing others who are chained can sow insecurity and doubt. Not unfounded doubt, the possibility is certainly present. While presenting a Halachic Prenup may provide a security, it is addressing the concern with a request/demand on the partner. From my own perspective, I dislike the idea of addressing feelings by placing a contract on the other person as a general rule, especially with a spouse. I know it can be very helpful in this instance, though I dislike that it may communicate "this is the way to deal with relationship issues."
I acknowledge there are certainly more than feelings at stake, which leads me to point #2...
The issue in point #2 is that it constitutes a breach of trust in the relationship. Like insurance, it may be considered a policy for safety, but the need for such a policy means there is a risk. The risk here is between two people, i.e. how they treat one another, which implies that one (in particular often the man) is the risk factor. It can even feel accusatory, particularly for a man who would not consider himself or his relationship at risk of getting to that point. Being the risk factor is certainly hard to hear, and may be construed as (pre)blame. I believe that breach is both mend-able and even strengthens a relationship when effectively addressed.
3) This Halachic Prenup is about other men/women, about agunot. Not about You/Me/Us.
This message is both prevalent in the article and one of the most used arguments when met with resistance. First, I have to say it is the worst way to try and convince a partner to accept a Halachic Prenup. Second, I believe it actually subverts the interpersonal or relationship concerns, which include insecurity and trust.
As I noted above, I am very much for movements and policies that grant leverage over people who abuse power, and the Halachic Prenup has potential to be quite effective. However, my own thoughts have brought to my attention the impact of considering the Halachic Prenup on a micro-scale, i.e. within a relationship.
I was once given advice that I should spend a day in family court before deciding to get married: half a day in divorce court and half a day in child-custody. At first it sounded like a horrible ordeal to witness and a sure way to dissuade me from marriage. Then I realized that if I am able to consider the worst with my partner and we can get through it together we will likely never get there. Working together through issues that tear couples apart can be a way to build a stronger relationship.
I am a stubborn believer in being prepared and working together in relationships and especially in marriage. To me, that is likely to include having very difficult conversations about raising children, financial issues, and Halachic concerns -both concerning (a) working towards staying together and (b) the unpleasant possibility that we split up. I still believe in it, I plan on having those conversations -including the Halachic Prenup and working through it with whomever I end up with.
Dec 6, 2013
What it's Like to be Single in Our Generation
Aziz Ansari on being single... surprising how some of it really resonates...
Aug 26, 2013
Stop Looking for Your Bashert
I was surprised to have run across this article over a year after it was posted on the OU's website, but I was equally surprised to see some of the points contained therein. Here's the short version:
1) There is no such thing as a "bashert" or "the one." Compatibility is in large part a choice to make things work.
2) Marriage doesn't just happen "at the right time," it takes work to build up to. Maybe even getting over yourself, at least a little bit.
3) Don't be so narrow minded about who may or may not be marriage potential.
4) People are not a half of anything, nor are they incomplete until marriage.
5) Stop being superficial. Question your image or expectations (eg. where did they come from? what about them is actually important?) instead of blindly letting them drive you.
6) Commitment is a choice most people make with a degree of uncertainty. We don't "just know" if the person is "right."
7) Online dating isn't pathetic or desperate, it's another path in the dating world.
1) There is no such thing as a "bashert" or "the one." Compatibility is in large part a choice to make things work.
2) Marriage doesn't just happen "at the right time," it takes work to build up to. Maybe even getting over yourself, at least a little bit.
3) Don't be so narrow minded about who may or may not be marriage potential.
4) People are not a half of anything, nor are they incomplete until marriage.
5) Stop being superficial. Question your image or expectations (eg. where did they come from? what about them is actually important?) instead of blindly letting them drive you.
6) Commitment is a choice most people make with a degree of uncertainty. We don't "just know" if the person is "right."
7) Online dating isn't pathetic or desperate, it's another path in the dating world.
Jul 12, 2013
Simple Dating
Saying that dating is complex is both an understatement and a self-evident fact for anyone who has been in the dating circuit for longer than a couple of dates.
But I believe we also tend towards simplifying the process. Thus categories for religious observance, arbitrary (or not so arbitrary) demarcations for level of religiosity and hashkafah, measurements and details, profiles and resumes, websites and shadchans. Everything to help make it easier to find "the right one."
As I gather dating experience, a feeling has been slowly creeping into my consciousness. A feeling of doubt, wondering if I've "missed the mark" when I've dismissed a suggestion or opportunity, a feeling of having been misunderstood or simplistically categorized and dismissed for whatever arbitrary (or not so arbitrary) information is used to determine compatibility. For a while -and perhaps still -it manifested as feeling judged. Seriously, how can someone presume to know and judge me having had fewer than ten interactions consisting of some texting, a phone call or two, and a couple of dates? Or perhaps I'm just being oversensitive here.
I have certainly felt judged for not spending huge chunks of my time learning and I've consequently experienced myself as having been categorized as valuing learning less, for example. At this point, whenever I see or hear someone place emphasis on kove'ah ittim, I've already come to expect it won't go far.
This is simple dating in its essence -drawing on a singular point of data to make inferences about a person's values, or to make sweeping generalizations about character.
I admit, I'm guilty of it. I've dismissed suggestions due to information that I did not see or information I saw from which I drew inferences about the woman that I've come to use as markers for character attributes and beliefs I'm looking for. I'm aware that I use education -specifically pursuit of a graduate degree -as a mark of the intelligence I seek, and that I specifically look for nurturing character traits in a partner (yes, "nurturing" is a buzz word with me).
I hold two core issues with this type of simplistic dating.
First, I think using a singular bit of data to draw inferences -such as pursuing a masters/doctorate for intelligence -provides both an incomplete and misleading image/understanding of what we are really looking for and who the other person is. Am I simply looking for a woman with a masters/doctorate or do I really want someone sharp that can hold an intense or intellectual conversation with? Are the two one and the same? What happens when I exclude women on the basis of their educational aspirations, am I including everyone who I think is for me, am I excluding everyone who isn't for me (even just considering intelligence)?
Second, I believe that people are more complex, and I think a great example of this is the complexity of my own beliefs and wants. I happen to have very strong traditional leanings, owing in no small part to my heritage and upbringing. I also happen to have very strong modern/secular and feminist leanings, due to both my education and experiences with my Mother and sister growing up.
Sometimes I let slip a few words that hint at my being traditional, and already I see the wheels turning. I have some strong beliefs about masculinity and femininity, about male and female differences. I've been told I should find a "traditional woman" more than a few times by people, which leads me to sincerely doubt their understanding of who I am and what I'm looking for.
I'm not simply looking to find someone to cook, clean and raise kids -all of which I appreciate tremendously. I also plan on being an active parent, but more than that I expect and plan on being involved in all areas of domestic life because it's a joint experience, joint responsibility, and joint endeavor. I want my children to have two primary caregivers. Gone are the days that man brings home flower and woman bakes it into bread; now we get to choose, or take turns, or do them both together. I value the flexibility and dynamic aspects of this type of relationship, it's something I want to fully engage in together with my partner.
Do I have one set of ideas about men's and women's roles? I have lots of thoughts, many ideas, some of them perhaps even seemingly conflicting. That's life, full of complexity, paradox, even conflict.
It's easier to categorize, to box people into polarized titles, to check off a "yes" or "no" on a mental list. It makes dating simpler by drawing inferences about a person's character, about who they are, based on less information. It is also a risk, as people are often more nuanced and complex. Sometimes I wonder if we're missing the mark by trying to pin down our understanding of the person we've barely met.
But I believe we also tend towards simplifying the process. Thus categories for religious observance, arbitrary (or not so arbitrary) demarcations for level of religiosity and hashkafah, measurements and details, profiles and resumes, websites and shadchans. Everything to help make it easier to find "the right one."
As I gather dating experience, a feeling has been slowly creeping into my consciousness. A feeling of doubt, wondering if I've "missed the mark" when I've dismissed a suggestion or opportunity, a feeling of having been misunderstood or simplistically categorized and dismissed for whatever arbitrary (or not so arbitrary) information is used to determine compatibility. For a while -and perhaps still -it manifested as feeling judged. Seriously, how can someone presume to know and judge me having had fewer than ten interactions consisting of some texting, a phone call or two, and a couple of dates? Or perhaps I'm just being oversensitive here.
I have certainly felt judged for not spending huge chunks of my time learning and I've consequently experienced myself as having been categorized as valuing learning less, for example. At this point, whenever I see or hear someone place emphasis on kove'ah ittim, I've already come to expect it won't go far.
This is simple dating in its essence -drawing on a singular point of data to make inferences about a person's values, or to make sweeping generalizations about character.
I admit, I'm guilty of it. I've dismissed suggestions due to information that I did not see or information I saw from which I drew inferences about the woman that I've come to use as markers for character attributes and beliefs I'm looking for. I'm aware that I use education -specifically pursuit of a graduate degree -as a mark of the intelligence I seek, and that I specifically look for nurturing character traits in a partner (yes, "nurturing" is a buzz word with me).
I hold two core issues with this type of simplistic dating.
First, I think using a singular bit of data to draw inferences -such as pursuing a masters/doctorate for intelligence -provides both an incomplete and misleading image/understanding of what we are really looking for and who the other person is. Am I simply looking for a woman with a masters/doctorate or do I really want someone sharp that can hold an intense or intellectual conversation with? Are the two one and the same? What happens when I exclude women on the basis of their educational aspirations, am I including everyone who I think is for me, am I excluding everyone who isn't for me (even just considering intelligence)?
Second, I believe that people are more complex, and I think a great example of this is the complexity of my own beliefs and wants. I happen to have very strong traditional leanings, owing in no small part to my heritage and upbringing. I also happen to have very strong modern/secular and feminist leanings, due to both my education and experiences with my Mother and sister growing up.
Sometimes I let slip a few words that hint at my being traditional, and already I see the wheels turning. I have some strong beliefs about masculinity and femininity, about male and female differences. I've been told I should find a "traditional woman" more than a few times by people, which leads me to sincerely doubt their understanding of who I am and what I'm looking for.
I'm not simply looking to find someone to cook, clean and raise kids -all of which I appreciate tremendously. I also plan on being an active parent, but more than that I expect and plan on being involved in all areas of domestic life because it's a joint experience, joint responsibility, and joint endeavor. I want my children to have two primary caregivers. Gone are the days that man brings home flower and woman bakes it into bread; now we get to choose, or take turns, or do them both together. I value the flexibility and dynamic aspects of this type of relationship, it's something I want to fully engage in together with my partner.
Do I have one set of ideas about men's and women's roles? I have lots of thoughts, many ideas, some of them perhaps even seemingly conflicting. That's life, full of complexity, paradox, even conflict.
It's easier to categorize, to box people into polarized titles, to check off a "yes" or "no" on a mental list. It makes dating simpler by drawing inferences about a person's character, about who they are, based on less information. It is also a risk, as people are often more nuanced and complex. Sometimes I wonder if we're missing the mark by trying to pin down our understanding of the person we've barely met.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)