The Adult Thing

[generaltojo]

A few quotes from this thread:

http://www.thefighting44s.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=7602&start=90

so you're being abandoned by everyone, and all you'll have to look forward to is loneliness, insecurity and, when you marry out of desperation, a lifetime of frustration and unhappiness.

That`s what those pathetic men deserve. If you see East Asian woman and white male couples who are happy then the adult thing to do is be happy for them.

I suppose I'm going to have to agree with the second sentiment - heck, if I don't, I'm a "pathetic man." Right?

But in conjunction with the comment "the adult thing," I'd like to loosely examine the math implied in such sentiments:

pathetic man = a child
pathetic = childish
the adult thing = happy
the child thing = angry, bitter

(It's a simplification, I know, but bear with me - I'm going somewhere with this.)

Okay.

But let's examine the reality surrounding this math...

- Adults are the cause of most of this worlds problems, not children.
- Children are often happier than adults.
- Adults often walk around with the weight of the world on their shoulders and are exceedingly unhappy.
- Racism is absent in children until taught to them by adults.
- Is it childish to recognize the sociological underpinnings that underlie WMAF couples?
- Is it pathetic?
- Is it adult to ignore such sociological underpinnings?
- Can that truly make you happy?
- They say ignorance is bliss, but is it?
- Is it childish to be troubled when an Asian woman is brazenly racist? Against their own race?
- Is it being an adult when you ignore a brazenly racist Asian woman being racist against you for being an Asian man?
- Can ignoring that make you happy?
- Can a child understand the dichotomy and fundamental irony when someone hates on their own race?
- Can a child understand the reasons underpinning this hatred - directed outwards and, unbeknownst to these "adults," themselves?
- Does a child have the capacity to understand the implications on the Asian American community as a whole?
- Can children really be aware of the games played by adults - games that often mix gender and race together in strange and upredictable results?
- Do adults ignore these games, or do they play them themselves?
- Do adults understand that playing these games are the norm, and the only way to advance themselves in this world?
- Can children truly understand why they get hurt, when they are hurting?
- Can adults are able to understand why they get hurt, especially when the reasons are around sophisticated issues concerning race and gender - and at the same time, want to get better by understanding?

My point?

Making such dualistic and linear distinctions is, plainly, being judgmental. As in "I'm more adult than you" or "You're such a child, and I am not." Hardly productive, or enlightened... which is what I think people are going for when they say things like "the adult thing."

Enlightenment is what I'm going for here... and that means going beyond dualistic, linear, two-dimensional thinking - and therefore going beyond judgment. And ego - because that's what making judgments tends to be all about - ego. "I'm grown up, why can't you be?"

Enlightment takes the wholeness of the process. Recognizing when someone is on a path towards it. Anger, bitterness, sadness - it's all part of it. You need to go through that to get better... and grow up. How many "adults" are out there who behave childishly? Who keep on making the same mistakes over and over again, and never seem to learn? I submit that these "adults" never really absorbed the lessons that they learned as a child. They just think they did... and graduated to being judgmental. I guess I should add another item to the list:

- Children are taught to be judgmental by adults. By themselves, they see the world with equal wonder.

Me, when I read stories about punking CCB's or banana splitting or whatever... I don't look at the story. I try to look at the person behind the story - what I know of them in any case - and I try to divorce my own ego or experiences when doing so, because SURPRISE! It ain't all about me.

And what I see is mixed. They could be the adults who never learn, and will always be children. Or they could be on the path to enlightenment. Or, they could be a big question mark... and my instinct is to give them the benefit of the doubt. Why? Because I was there. That doesn't make me better, "more adult." Hell, no... but it does make me far more sympathetic and - dare I say it? - compassionate than your average joe who dismisses such things as "childish" or "whiny" or whatever. And the ideal adult is compassionate.

Closed fist. Open heart. I've bought into it. I think a lot of people out there need to do the same.

[Dialectic]

I agree with the general sentiment behind Tojo's words: we should accept and be compassionate towards those "more damaged" or perhaps "less mature" than ourselves, because we had to go through some form of those experiences too.

I disagree with Toj's depiction of children. (This is really a minor point, as the above theme is what you should take away, but I feel it's important.) Childhood is not bliss, children are not purely taught my adults to judge, kids are not filled with wonder and happiness and rainbows; this is a romantic adult view of childhood.

Childhood is a time of raw emotion in all its forms, and is as terrifying and judgmental as it is joyful and accepting. Children are far more egocentric than adults (they can take less points of view and their worlds are much more focused on themselves), and childhood is no paradise that is lost on entering adolescence or adulthood.

Babies, young children, I'll even include adolescents, they're not very peaceful at all. Notice in your own experience with them that everything might seem fine and dandy one minute, and as soon as the least thing bothers them, as soon as they feel an uncomfortable feeling, or sense an unwelcome occurrence, they act out and scream, fight, resist, until the issue is resolved, either by taking away the stimulus or simply exhausting themselves. The world centers around them. This is hardly being at peace or being filled with wonder at the majesty of existence. This is egocentricity. (Yes, a great many adults act this way as well, and I would agree with Tojo on this point that they are still "child-like" that is, from a more mature viewpoint, they are suffering from developmental arrest.)

The reason I make this point is that a great many people out there believe some variation of a "lost innocence" or "lost paradise" theme in psychological and spiritual development: that, to be truly happy and free, we'd have to find a way to go "back" to some previous phase of life and development, where we didn't recognize certain patterns, certain differences, certain things about ourselves and the world, when we were much more of an amorphous entity or blank slate. This is regression, and this is a dangerous belief to have. This can lead to a sense of despair, meaninglessness, and regressive, fucked-up behaviour. What is required is further development, further maturation, a transcendence and acceptance of previous phases, a further decrease in egocentricity. This is the process of enlightenment.

[generaltojo]

I don't believe that children have it better - that they live in a world of wonder, or peace, or contentment. I believe that the *belief* that being "adult" is the state of enlightenment is flawed. It implies linear thinking - the older you get, the more "adult" habits you learn, the better you are. You and I both know that that's bullshit; people who buy into it are egocentrically protecting their own, what they have, and what they selfishly want. Age is the biggest form of prejudice there is. Age is the easiest form of judgment there is. Age is the biggest weakness, wielded by those who don't have much more to wield.

If it seems like I have a contempt of adulthood, it's not because I'm contemptuous of the state, but the perception of the state, the glorification of it by people who have nothing better within themselves to glorify. Older is better. Age is better. Experience is better. All pure and utter bullshit.

The conventional belief that being "adult" is the better state, I find offensive. Such linear thinking only protects bad habits learned thoughout the process of aging, as opposed to the good habits we can and should pick up. Dismissing it as "romanticism" of childhood is ageism, and it's based in egocentricity worse than anything you'd find in a child, because it's considered.

To put it simply, I'll take the pettiness and politics of a child over that of an adult, because the child doesn't know any better, doesn't have a political context to gain more than he or she gains, to hurt more than he or she hurts. Along the same vein, I'll take the true enlightenment of an adult over the innocence of a child because it is *integral* that that person moves beyond plain innocence, past and cynicism and despair, to get to some place greater.

You make it sound like I think I am better than those "more damaged" or "less mature." That is incorrect. I *am* "more damaged" or "less mature." I would never use those phrases, because that's *exactly* falling into the trap the original quoters in this thread did.

[Dialectic]

Fair enough. On a separate but somewhat related note, I read an article a while back on how babies essentially become "racist" by about three months of age.

I don't mean "racist" in the sense of "I'm white and better than everyone!" or "dark-skinned people are animals" or anything like that, but rather, that an infant begins to identify with those who are like its immediate caretakers (a sort of proto-ethnocentricity). You unfortunately have to pay for a copy of the entire study, something I'm not going to do, but there's a brief summary here, along with links to related studies:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=16466424&dopt=Abstract

These results aren't surprising; given what we know about moral and cognitive development, this is a healthy part of growing up. In other words, human beings will always go through some sort of ethnocentric or "racist" state on their way to becoming peaceful pluralists, if they ever get there. You start life not knowing the difference between you and not-you, you eventually recognize a "you," you identify only with you, then you identify with your caregivers, your immediate family, your "people," then all people, then all of existence, assuming you get that far.

Babies and little kids act obnoxious and selfish because not only do they not give a shit, but they're not capable of giving a shit for others. I understand your frustrations with adults acting that way when they do know better and have the capacity to care, and I suppose I'd agree that I'd take a child's selfishness over an adult's.

I'm just saying that phases of maturation exist. I don't think I said anything about you or I being "better" than those who are more damaged or less mature; I'm simply saying that those who may indeed be more mature or less damaged should care for those who weren't graced in their lives to get to that state, and also that we shouldn't romanticize childhood or villainize adulthood. It's true that some adults need to grow up; it's also true that those who are suffering as a result of being "stunted" or damaged shouldn't hold onto that damage like a badge of honor or identity.

I don't mean to contradict you for the sake of argument; I have little interest in that myself. I was just hoping to clarify what I perceived as harmful distortions in views of maturity and development. I hope I've made some sense.

[Infectious]

And by 4 or 5, they've already "learned" the societal images of racial hierarchy; when asked (in a study) which doll is better, girls often picked the white doll, even if they were black, and when asked which doll represented them, the black girls hesistated on the white doll before picking the black one.

Kids pick up stuff faster than we think.

[generaltojo]

Talk about getting derailed. If I wanted to debate child development, I'd dig up the corpse of Jean Piaget and talk to him about it (wait a minute, is he dead yet?)

Sheesh, what a tangent of cattygurlian proportions. :wink:

[kalbi]

Talk about getting derailed. If I wanted to debate child development, I'd dig up the corpse of Jean Piaget and talk to him about it (wait a minute, is he dead yet?)

Sheesh, what a tangent of cattygurlian proportions. :wink:


LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Preach, nigga... preach. :lol: