Societal norms

So this article got me thinking:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/20/t-magazine/artist-marriage-albers.html

A lot of what I think about as an artist and an austist, are what is typical or not in different situations.

But it is a given, typically, that we all partner with an individual and then remain monogomous for the duration of the relationship. Perhaps forever.

I don't not agree with this, I am myself in a monogomous relationship and very happy about that.

However, when did this singular rule become the way? It is unspoken that when you look across the animal kingdom, monogomous animal relationships are quite rare? Mostly animals have multiple relationships throughout their lives, so why then do humans pretend to be different?

I think there is a lot to be said for obtaining different things from different relationships. Why else would we require the cultivating of friendships if this were not the case?

Parents
  • I find the ‘we all…’ in that quite triggering, though I know that wasn’t your intention. The presumption of a relationship or several in everyone’s life simply as a given seems a very NT thing to me, but it seems to be almost as prevalent in a community like this. Which is upsetting when one just hopes not to feel like an outsider even among outsiders. The ultra orthodox as a mandatory or presumed inevitable thing is so relentlessly driven  into us by the media etc. that I appreciate it’s an unconscious thing on your part and not a wilful act of exclusion  

  • I see your point and note that I'm no linguist. I'm also still adapting to use of language in relation to ASC so bare with me.

    I think the 'we all' part is there because to me that is the assumption that is made, that 'we' equals a blanketed norm that doesn't identify the individual or diverse subset of neurotypes that exist in society and is as such what I am calling out?

    Being influenced verses what we need. But I guess I'm saying that these baseline predispositions that stand as some sort of unwritten framework for 'how citizens should engage' is a dogmatic set of principles that I'm not comfortable with.

    There is expectation put on us from birth, and I realise I never agreed to be part of any if it. Projections that began with my parents and are maintained by their ideals projected upon me i realise. Now a father myself, I'm questioning why I've always felt suppressed by them and how to undo the implications of those restrictions?

Reply
  • I see your point and note that I'm no linguist. I'm also still adapting to use of language in relation to ASC so bare with me.

    I think the 'we all' part is there because to me that is the assumption that is made, that 'we' equals a blanketed norm that doesn't identify the individual or diverse subset of neurotypes that exist in society and is as such what I am calling out?

    Being influenced verses what we need. But I guess I'm saying that these baseline predispositions that stand as some sort of unwritten framework for 'how citizens should engage' is a dogmatic set of principles that I'm not comfortable with.

    There is expectation put on us from birth, and I realise I never agreed to be part of any if it. Projections that began with my parents and are maintained by their ideals projected upon me i realise. Now a father myself, I'm questioning why I've always felt suppressed by them and how to undo the implications of those restrictions?

Children