Mistress Matisse who I read regularly tweeted yesterday something that I replied to but have had time to think about and feel that I need to say more on the subject because it was offensive and it irritated me. The tweet in question was this:"Theory: if someone has not ever chosen to cohabitate with a partner by age 40, the odds of him/her ever deciding to do so are slim. Discuss."
My reply was as follows:
"Er.. if they had the *option* and chose not to, maybe. If they never had the option before, then I'd say that's not true."
The more I've thought about this, the more cross it's made me. In particular coming from someone involved in the whole 'sex and relationships' industry. There are many reasons why cohabitation may not have occurred before age 40 and I would say many have zero implications on whether or not after this magic age of 40 most people are somehow statistically out of options.
First of all, there is no general promise in this life that you are going to get someone to cohabitate with. Before I discuss any other aspect of this question, I'd like to make that abundantly clear. This isn't a life guarantee. For some people, it just doesn't happen. So regardless of if you are 25 or 40 or 70, if the dice weren't in your favor, then they weren't in your favor. Is there some magic age limit when you are suddenly out of luck? No. And actually, after a lot of people get out of their 'starter marriages', I'd say that there are many people who find love and relationships post-40. Sometimes that includes finding someone who, shock and horror, may not have been married or cohabitated with anyone before. So in general, I call bullshit on this.
If there is some physical or social reason that makes you less likely to find a partner, are you more or less likely to find a partner before or after age 40? Again I call bullshit and say this is an arbitrary number that doesn't matter. I suppose if there is something actually hindering you that makes it harder for you to find someone, then it's reasonable to assume it may continue to be difficult to find someone, but also, think of all the years you may have already spent looking! Maybe by 40 you are better at it, or people who know you accept you more for who you are. Are you statistically less likely to find your life partner (and live with them) because 40 came and went? I don't think so.
Here's what I particular dislike about this tweet. It implies by its very nature that there is something wrong with someone who hasn't managed to achieve this apparent life aim of cohabitation. It does not take into account what they may want, or what choices may or may not have been available to them. It just casually dismisses anyone over 40 for having something so wrong with them that there is no hope for them in the future. Well, all the over 40's who haven't cohabitated but want to, I suppose you should all just go kill yourselves now, because I guess there just isn't any hope for you.
Which brings me around to my original response which has everything to do with the use of the word choice as the single way out of this abhorrent comment that I'll allow. I suppose it is possible that if you are someone who found great relationships but chose not to cohabitate and you have not addressed (or do not care to address) why you chose not to cohabitate, then amazingly it is true, as you pass the age of 40 you are likely to be the same person you were at 39 who does not choose to cohabitate with others. However, that seems like a not so intelligent sort of comment about people and their behavior, and so not the one that I think was intended, and certainly not what was conveyed.
Now in general, I don't think twitter is even the right place for a conversation or debate like this. Most obviously it doesn't give the original author space to explain exactly what they meant and instead leaves a rather insulting statement of only one sentence to try and do the job for them. Usually I enjoy following Matisse and her offerings. This time I'm afraid, not so much.
No comments:
Post a Comment