Saturday, March 13, 2010

Standards: I do not think it means what you think it means

A book came out recently with the thesis that people should lower their romantic standards, even going to far as to suggest that people should marry someone who doesn't meet their standards.

Based on what I've seen in reviews, the book makes a good argument. The examples given of too-high standards look foolish, making those of us whose standards aren't anywhere near that foolish feel smug and good about ourselves, and making it tempting to buy the book as a gift for people who you think are handling their private lives foolishly. I'm sure it will sell very well.

But I find myself wondering whether it really is ultimately helpful to ask people to ignore their standards. Standards tend to be there for a reason; that's why they're standards. Think about your own standards. Aren't they there for a reason? Even if they're foolish?

As an example, we'll take the most foolish of my own standards: I find facial hair repulsive. Yes, this sentiment is foolish, shallow, petty, and hypocritical. However, the fact remains that it's like an emergency power cut on my libido. I would, by far, much rather go to bed alone than feel facial hair touch me while my noun is being verbed, no matter how skilled the mouth surrounded by that facial hair or how awesome the person whom it's attached to.

Now suppose you were looking at me as a prospective partner. And suppose you have facial hair, or would like to retain the option of having facial hair in the future. (If you can't identify with having facial hair, replace it with any other part of your body where you want the option of not necessarily diligently removing hair for the entire rest of your life.) Would you want me to try to ignore my revulsion and move forward in our relationship? Would you want a partner who's struggling not to cringe every time you kiss her, or engaging in a sexual power struggle over personal grooming? Wouldn't you rather I leave you alone so you can use your time and energy to pursue someone who isn't repulsed by standard personal grooming choices?

The same goes with all my standards. They're there for a reason. Even when they are objectively foolish, they're either factors that would cause me to find it more enjoyable to spend time alone than with someone who doesn't meet a given standard, or factors that would be a hindrance to making a life together in the long term. And I'm sure that your standards are the same. I just don't see that any good could come of trying to ignore them.

2 comments:

Hershele Ostropoler said...

No facial hair sounds perfectly reasonable to me, actually. Not that it's not ... I wouldn't say "foolish"; let's call it "arbitrary" ... but neither state (having or not having) is permanent or inborn. If a portion of my life might be devoted to a relationship with you, I can shave for that portion. I'm not sure I'd even call it a standard, since it doesn't permanently exclude anybody.

I mean,I see your larger point, I just wanted to comment on the applicability of that particular example.

laura k said...

I would, by far, much rather go to bed alone than feel facial hair touch me while my noun is being verbed, no matter how skilled the mouth surrounded by that facial hair or how awesome the person whom it's attached to.

Classic Imp Strump here.