Not that kind of girl
Aug. 25th, 2011 09:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
livRecently, I've been finding myself saying "I don't think of myself as the kind of person who..." Chatting to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
blue_mai at the weekend made me step back and think about whether that's actually a useful way to look at things.
To start with, I don't believe that there is any fundamental way people are. There's only the collection of things you do. If I start doing different activities then I'm a different (kind of) person from who I was previously. At the same time, it's only natural to associate with groups of people who do (and believe) broadly similar things, and that's what gives us kinds of people.
pw201 linked to a very useful article about atheism as a brand. (I don't think "brand" is quite what Hallquist means, but let's go along with his terminology.) What he's saying ties in what I've been thinking about; there is a kind of person who define themselves as atheists, and someone may well assent to the proposition that there is no God, without really fitting into that type, or agreeing with the kinds of things that people who socialize as atheists usually say. Hallquist draws a very useful comparison to feminism; a person may well assent to the proposition that women should have equal rights, but not really feel part of the movement or group of people who define themselves as feminists. (Note that he doesn't stereotype feminists as being bra-burning, hairy-legged manhaters, he's talking about a tendency that I think really exists, for feminists to generally go along with a sort of watered-down version of American academic liberalism.) And people who believe the central tenet of a movement, but don't really fit in socially or ideologically with the "type", may experience quite a lot of peer pressure to accept more and more of the secondary issues that only happen to be associated with the core tenet.
I think this issue probably holds true for little things as well as major political affiliations like that. When I say "I don't think of myself as the kind of person who goes to the gym", what exactly do I mean by that? Do I somehow believe that all people who go to the gym are either obsessed with their appearance and following the latest fashions and neurotic about their bodies? Or that all of them are serious, hard-core athletes training for major feats of endurance? Of course I don't, that's patently ridiculous. But still, it sort of goes against the grain, my self-image is of someone who isn't invested in my physical being at all, and who constantly needs more mental stimulation than a gym workout provides. Those traits still describe me, but I now have another trait: I'm someone who cares about being physically fit enough to be able to do and enjoy certain activities.
The biggest reason I keep coming back to "I don't think of myself as the kind of person" is about being engaged. When I was a kid I imagined my life in my 30s; I hoped I would have long hair, I would live alone, I would be a scientist working and teaching in a university. But I really did not at all imagine that I would have a romantic partner, let alone planning to marry him! I think I probably do hold some stereotypical ideas about the kind of person who gets married; perhaps they have a reasonably settled lives, perhaps they are willing to put one person above everybody else they care about, perhaps they are confident in their expectation of feeling the same way for the rest of their lives. Of course I know that's not true, because my married friends are as diverse in their life paths and attitudes to relationships as my unmarried friends. But it's not just the stereotype, it's that I thought the things I wanted to do in my life were pretty incompatible with getting married. I still want those things, I just want to spend the rest of my life withjack as well.
I think what I'm groping for is that I want to accept that some aspects of my self-image may be wrong or just simply out of date. But also that it's possible to do things and join groups I never expected I'd do or join, without that compromising the things that fundamentally make me who I am. It's a bit confusing, though!
blue_mai at the weekend made me step back and think about whether that's actually a useful way to look at things. To start with, I don't believe that there is any fundamental way people are. There's only the collection of things you do. If I start doing different activities then I'm a different (kind of) person from who I was previously. At the same time, it's only natural to associate with groups of people who do (and believe) broadly similar things, and that's what gives us kinds of people.
pw201 linked to a very useful article about atheism as a brand. (I don't think "brand" is quite what Hallquist means, but let's go along with his terminology.) What he's saying ties in what I've been thinking about; there is a kind of person who define themselves as atheists, and someone may well assent to the proposition that there is no God, without really fitting into that type, or agreeing with the kinds of things that people who socialize as atheists usually say. Hallquist draws a very useful comparison to feminism; a person may well assent to the proposition that women should have equal rights, but not really feel part of the movement or group of people who define themselves as feminists. (Note that he doesn't stereotype feminists as being bra-burning, hairy-legged manhaters, he's talking about a tendency that I think really exists, for feminists to generally go along with a sort of watered-down version of American academic liberalism.) And people who believe the central tenet of a movement, but don't really fit in socially or ideologically with the "type", may experience quite a lot of peer pressure to accept more and more of the secondary issues that only happen to be associated with the core tenet. I think this issue probably holds true for little things as well as major political affiliations like that. When I say "I don't think of myself as the kind of person who goes to the gym", what exactly do I mean by that? Do I somehow believe that all people who go to the gym are either obsessed with their appearance and following the latest fashions and neurotic about their bodies? Or that all of them are serious, hard-core athletes training for major feats of endurance? Of course I don't, that's patently ridiculous. But still, it sort of goes against the grain, my self-image is of someone who isn't invested in my physical being at all, and who constantly needs more mental stimulation than a gym workout provides. Those traits still describe me, but I now have another trait: I'm someone who cares about being physically fit enough to be able to do and enjoy certain activities.
The biggest reason I keep coming back to "I don't think of myself as the kind of person" is about being engaged. When I was a kid I imagined my life in my 30s; I hoped I would have long hair, I would live alone, I would be a scientist working and teaching in a university. But I really did not at all imagine that I would have a romantic partner, let alone planning to marry him! I think I probably do hold some stereotypical ideas about the kind of person who gets married; perhaps they have a reasonably settled lives, perhaps they are willing to put one person above everybody else they care about, perhaps they are confident in their expectation of feeling the same way for the rest of their lives. Of course I know that's not true, because my married friends are as diverse in their life paths and attitudes to relationships as my unmarried friends. But it's not just the stereotype, it's that I thought the things I wanted to do in my life were pretty incompatible with getting married. I still want those things, I just want to spend the rest of my life with
jack as well.I think what I'm groping for is that I want to accept that some aspects of my self-image may be wrong or just simply out of date. But also that it's possible to do things and join groups I never expected I'd do or join, without that compromising the things that fundamentally make me who I am. It's a bit confusing, though!
