Little Downers

It turns out that she's moved into a new apartment, reasonably priced, with roommates she seems to like. She's started her new job and is loving it.

We talked for about three minutes and then she said that she and her roommates were watching a movie and they wanted her to get back to it. So that was it.

I guess I deserved that.

I'm pretty envious that she's gone from a bad situation into a terrific one while I continue along in my bizarre little limbo.

Mo wrote an entry on what she wants in a significant other.

The interesting thing to me is that a lot of what she wants seems to me to be self-evident. As in, "sure, why would I want a partner who wasn't emotionally available, open and honest, mature, supportive, and independent?" While one could argue about the degree to which my past girlfriends have met these criteria, they've all met them to my satisfaction at the time.

There are things on the list I think I do pretty well. I work hard to be honest in my relationships, for instance (heck, some of my friends think I'm too honest). There are some things on the list that make me cringe a little because I know I haven't scored so well in that area in the past (such as being supportive and giving when my partner is sick), but which I've tried to do better on as I've gained experience.

And I do think many of these points are things people learn through experience. I hope that Mo (and everyone, for that matter) allows for this. I guess to some degree dating involves training our partners so that even if it doesn't work out, they'll be a better partner for someone else for having dated us.

I've talked at some length about how I feel like I'm "stuck" for finding someone with whom I share interests. Reading comic books and science fiction are such a big part of my life that anyone I end up in a long-term relationship with would need to be able to deal with that. I'll probably still be reading them in ten, twenty, forty years. If time becomes short (say, because we have a kid), I'm likely to give up other hobbies (movies, television, the Internet) before I give up those.

And, I admit that I've felt starved enough throughout my life for good friends to share the experience of reading good comics or science fiction, that I keep holding out hope that there's a woman out there for me with whom I can share those things.

Though, odds are, there isn't. Neither of those hobbies are shared by many women, and science fiction in particular has been eclipsed by fantasy and faux science fiction as represented on television. (Babylon 5, arguably the best science fiction TV show in history, is pretty different from written SF.) Fandom of written SF is getting older, and is not being replaced by younger fans. I tend to be one of the three or four youngest members of any SF fan group I'm part of.

Anyway.

That aside, my biggest fear about finding a significant other is finding someone with similar life goals to myself. For instance, I have a hard time seeing myself living the rest of my life in the Bay Area. It's too expensive (I'd have to marry someone at least as wealthy as myself - if not more so - to afford to live around here for the long term), and the threat of a major earthquake over the long haul does put me off the idea. I certainly don't want to live in the South. Ideally I'd like to live somewhere where there's a winter with snow.

Does this seem frivolous? It seems crucial to me.

Sometimes I think it's hopeless and I should just get used to being on my own.

Another journaller named Columbine wrote a list of what she thinks you should know as a functioning adult American. Core knowledge that we all ought to have, that is.

It's an interesting list. I agree with most of it. The main points on which I disagree naturally have to do with my own quirks.

For instance, knowing how household chemicals mix, or being able to do a soil composition test. Sure, it's useful if you need that specific knowledge, but why on earth am I going to mix Comet and ammonia compounds? What the heck do I need to do a soil composition test for? Isn't this why we have city governments (says the liberal)? Knowing the kinds of soil and plants around where I live is also not very useful. Being able to identify dangerous plants (poison ivy, poisonous berries) seems genuinely useful.

While I think most of the data in the history section is good to know, I think the description mostly misses the point of the principles that those events teach. I think we often put the cart before the horse when considering history: The saying goes that those who are ignorant of the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them. I think it's better to think of history as a set of actual examples of certain principles put into action and how they turned out. (I wonder how many high school teachers ask questions like, "Give three examples of how fear of technological progress has affected the lives of Americans"?)

I think geography is highly overrated. I think being aware of what you do and don't know about geography, and being able to fill in the blanks when you do need to know, is sufficient. Being able to look up on a map where Utah is, and figure out where the major airports are before you call Lucy to order a ticket seems sufficient to me. (I have no idea where Sierra Leone is, nor why I should care. If I had reason to care, I'm reasonably certain I could find out.) That said, being able to verify that China would need to develop ICBMs before they could lob nukes at us seems like something one ought to be able to do if it happens to be an issue in a Presidential election.

Okay, here's the biggie: Literature and Fine Arts don't really matter. Not really. I do firmly believe that one can be a valuable member of society without having read a novel since high school, or knowing a thing about any famous painter in history. It's not something I'd like to do, and I think that reading (and what one reads) says something about one's character. But I just don't think it's crucial to being a "functioning adult American".

That said, I find it somewhat ridiculous that her lists make no reference to either Superman or Jack Kirby.

Well, it's all relative, I guess.

I've been a little down the last couple of days. Things haven't quite been going my way, though nothing horrible has happened.

For instance, the cardiovascular machines I use at the health club were both broken when I worked out yesterday. I tried a few minutes on the Stairmaster (for the first time) and didn't really care for it. It didn't feel like something I could easily read while doing, either.

Reconstructing my hard drive after its unceremonious death on Friday has been a drag. And a lot of wasted time. And a little duplication of work since I didn't have everything on it backed up (though I had most of it!).

I sent mail out to a bunch of people yesterday asking if they'd like to come over tomorrow night to watch the season premiere of The West Wing. Only Subrata replied, and all he said was, "I'll have to wait and see when I get back into town." To add proverbial insult to theoretical injury, John called me tonight to say if no one was planning to come to my place, I could come up to his place (and have the 30 minute drive back after 11 pm that I want to avoid [okay, he didn't actually say that]).

And, Apple stock is continuing to go down this week. Which actually doesn't affect me as much as it does many other people at the company, since I haven't been there long enough to have really good options (and those I do have mostly aren't vested).

Well, at least I have my kitties to comfort me. I've spent a bunch of time reading on the couch this week, and they like lying with me. I do want to get a new, more comfortable, couch for this reading. My futon doesn't really cut it.

Oh, and the Athletics beat the Yankees in the first game of their playoff series. So there is hope.