So, while I think that in part I do undue violence to myself on this weblog, and that I must change that, I also say that in many posts I am not “procrastinating” but attempting to call forth the person who writes, and who is a person I either hid very well, or tortured and killed, or both, I am not sure. She is difficult to call forth, I will tell you, and she has good reason for it. I am going to take on the luxury of being that person, the pristine and confident version of me that lives elsewhere, in just a few minutes and stay in that identity for three hours.
However, I cannot resist this: here is an article on marriage by a therapist. Clarissa, look at it, you will just have to laugh. Gosh — “settling” — just so you can be married — and for what, exactly? I mean: this article recommends going into marriages knowing you are ambivalent about them, on the theory that you HAVE to be married.
I can remember what I was taught about that. First, that I was not attractive enough to be chosen by someone who would be nice to me, so I should look for someone who would be as non-abusive as possible. Because abusability was what I had to offer. Later, that one should marry for love and not out of desperation or fear of solitude. Or that marriage itself was an old paradigm. Do we really have to “settle,” now?