"REAL SIMPLE Quote of the Day" Post: Relating

“Just because we were related

didn’t mean we were any good

at understanding each other.”

                   ― Anne Tyler

Circa 1973

I receive a "Quote of the Day" each morning from Real Simple magazine. This morning's quote immediately brought to mind my relationship with my sister, Cyndie. Being the oldest sibling, I was the "no fun disciplinarian" of the bunch, and the quote has probably been appropriate for each of my siblings at one time or another in our lives. But Cyndie is who first came to mind.

Since I was the oldest and she was next oldest, we were destined to share bedrooms all of our childhood, and you could not have thrown two more different girls together in a small space. "The Odd Couple" does not sufficiently describe us.

Cyndie was the free spirit - the "Oscar Madison" - the popular party girl with lots of friends. Probably her attitude about high school was to enjoy, to have fun, to "find" herself.

I, on the very opposite other hand, was the "Felix Ungar" - always living by the code of "should", neat freak, studious and hidden behind a wall of what was expected.

Though our tastes in clothes and boys were so different we thought the other to be "gross," somehow we still managed to argue about not "borrowing" each other's clothes. Fortunately, we never "borrowed" each other's boyfriends - not that I know of anyway.

A perfect example of the antagonistic nature of our sisterhood:  Several times after a date, one or the other of us extended beyond the bounds of our curfew, at which time the front door would be locked. Of course, the very few times it happened to me, I assumed the resolution to my dilemma was to climb the back fence and knock on our bedroom window. Surely my dear sister would let me in. No way.

But I didn't let her in either.

I'm not sure what Cyndie's reaction to that "knock-knock" cry for help was, but mine was to lie in bed snickering and thinking, "Serves her right."

Though we are still as different as can be, our story has a happy ending. From previous blogs, (Sister Left, Sister Right) many of you know that Cyndie's political leanings are to the left, and mine are to the right. When we travel, she prefers to dive in to the culture - to meet residents, even live with them. I prefer to remain with a group and stay in a hotel. She is still a free spirit, and I still work to tear down the wall of expectations.

But today, we are as close as sisters can (and "should") be. We admire, respect and learn from each other. It has taught me that whether we're related or not, accepting and learning from our differences in fact, leads to better understanding.

Circa 2009

Five Questions for Edward "Ned" Downie, Satirist

 

Ned is thought to be hiding in Northwest Arkansas, where he is sought in connection with serial violations of the Elmore Leonard Rules. As the satirist member of the Northwest Arkansas Writers Workshop, his short stories have appeared in several anthologies.

We writers often meet for dinner before our regular Thursday night meetings. Often, the subject of politics arises, and I have found that some are happy to discuss opinions and others would prefer not. Ned has been someone with whom I've had several such discussions. Most are matter-of-fact and respectful, though a few have become heated enough that one or the other of us decided it best to bite our tongues. Ouch.

It has caused me some curiousity about political discussions and non-discussions. Why is it that politics (and religion) can be such a challenge to talk about?

In my humble opinion, it's because many of us believe we are right - that our "side" is the only side, and therefore, we owe no credence to what the other "side" thinks. To that, I quote Max Born:

The belief that there is only one truth, and that oneself is in possession of it, is the root of all evil in the world."

Sister Left, Sister Right - Conclusion

Many of you have asked about the results of the experiment my left-leaning sister and I (right-leaning)agreed to perform. (See my blog dated February 18, 2010.) Sister Left, Sister Right

In this experiment, we each selected a program from a media source which we both agreed was biased to the "right" -- Fox News, and the "left" -- MSNBC. I asked her to watch "Special Report with Bret Baier" on Fox News, and she asked me to watch "The Rachel Maddow Show" on MSNBC. We felt these two programs tended to be "fair and balanced."

I watched 2.5 of Rachel Maddow's shows, trying to keep an open mind. Initially, I found much of what she said provocative, and worth considering -- after all, I was trying to keep an open mind. However, the more I listened to her, the more offended I became at her sarcasm and wisecracking, usually at the expense of conservatives. The longer I watched, the harder it became to keep my mind open to her views and opinions.

Believe me, I realize this happens all the time on "the right," also. Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh -- all present opinions with which I generally agree, but I am often "turned off" by their presentation, and I wonder if those center-minded, and certainly left-minded people must shut their minds off to it, also.

As for my sister, she did watch Bret Baier, and commented that she felt it was a fairly balanced (no pun intended,) and calm, unemotionally presented news program.

But shortly after that, when I asked her what she thought of later editions, she commented that she had decided that watching or listening to politically-oriented programs -- on either side of the political spectrum -- brought her unnecessary anxiety. She told me she didn't think it was worth it to have that kind of stress in her life, and she didn't really want to participate in the experiment anymore.

I was disappointed, but I also understood, especially after recently getting into a political discussion with a friend with whom I'd previously been able to discuss any difference. On this particular instance, we'd gotten into a discussion about social justice or injustice, as the case may be. Should we take from the rich to give to the poor? Is it "fair?" And what about bailouts? This discussion did not remain calm and unemotional as most of our previous discussions had. Things were said by both of us. And though they may have been intended to provoke thought or change, instead, they brought hurt feelings.

It was a sad eye-opener for me. If I can't discuss differences with a sister I love and respect, and a good friend who I've respected for several years, the vitriol and lack of respect for differences of opinion really has gotten out of hand.

I did not come away from this experiement with any answers. Only more questions -- the first one being, "Why?"

Sister Left, Sister Right

This week, Evan Bayh, U.S. Senator from Indiana, announced his retirement, stating:

“For some time, I have had a growing conviction that Congress is not operating as it should. There is too much partisanship and not enough progress -- too much narrow ideology and not enough practical problem-solving. Even at a time of enormous challenge, the peoples’ business is not being done.”

What is it about politics that makes us so divisive?

Recently, my sister and I made a repeat attempt at discussing our philosophical differences, and though we each started out tiptoeing on proverbial glass paths, we managed to deep-breathe our way into an interesting discussion.

I love my sister. I admire her thoughtfulness and intelligence. She is one of few people in this world I trust completely. Yet, in the past, when we have discussed politics, we barely broach the second sentence before one or both of our blood pressures begin to boil with defensiveness and/or anger.

I don’t like titles, and I believe in politics, they are used too-often as name calling. But for the sake of clarification, my sister leans liberal and I lean conservative. We both feel strongly about our beliefs, but I also think we are both interested in the opinion of “the other side,” if not open-minded.

So, in our last discussion, as we each found ourselves working hard to keep our emotions in check so we could continue the conversation, I asked, “What do you think it is about politics that makes it so hard to discuss a topic without vitriol and emotion sabotaging the conversation?” I went on to tell her about the many liberal friends I have, with whom I can discuss any topic, EXCEPT politics, even though I am hungry to hear their opinions about current events. But I fear the anger it will stir up. In fact, with many of my friends, I sense such disdain of “the other side,” I remain a “closet conservative.”

Some friends and family to whom I’ve confessed my political leanings have replied, “Oh, Jan. You’re not a conservative,” as if there is something nasty or criminal about it.

So, my sister thought about my question for a moment, then said, “I think it’s because of Fox News. They feed on drawing anger toward the left from their audience. It’s like a drug.”

My heart pounded, as I prepared to come to the defense of the beast that feeds my political soul. I was ready to throw my hands in the air, feeling as though she’d just attacked my child. But I took a deep breath, and realized that my very reaction should make me reconsider. So, I toned down my defense, and replied, “I agree there are some people on Fox News that play off people’s anger, but not all of Fox is like that.”

But, I admit. I couldn’t let her get away with her “attack” completely unscathed. I couldn’t resist knocking “the left’s babies” around a little, too. “Besides,” I said, “what about Air America and MSNBC? Do you think they’re ‘fair and balanced?’”
We watched each other for a moment, and I think the answer struck us both at the same time.

It’s the media.

Each “side” has its own media, whether television, print, blogs, etc.; monsters that feed on sensational disagreement. And it is like a drug. The more sensational the disagreement, the more we watch for confirmation that our opinions are the right and true opinions, and that the other side is wrong.

Politics has been turned into a kind of prejudice.

prej•u•dice (prěj'ə-dĭs)
noun
1.a. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.
b. A preconceived preference or idea.

It has become a battle, with each “side” doing what it can to be the winner. The ability to have decent dialogue has been lost in the battle. And the problem with that is, as evidenced by retirements such as Senator Bayh’s, the real loser is our country.


So, we are considering an experiment. For a month, we will each watch a program of the other’s choosing. I picked “Special Report with Bret Baier,” on Fox News Channel, and she picked “The Rachel Maddow Show” on MSNBC. Once we each accept these challenges (and they will be challenges,) we will watch, take notes, and if necessary, do the research to rebuke what the programs discussed.
I know each of us is hesitant to proceed, because we’re not sure if we can tolerate “the other side’s” media through the experiment. But, isn’t that the very reason we should conduct it?

If the experiment works as we hope it will, I’ll post results on my blog.