Thursday, March 8, 2012

9 Days

Reason #9: Trader Joe's. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe I've overlooked this oft visited and much adored grocery store (can this be true?--apparently, I just checked). Cheap, delicious cheese meets fun snacklets and dinner munchies in this fabulous stop. If you ever want to overwhelm a visitor from the True North, just let them wander the aisles for a bit.

Now, with only nine (what a frightful single digit!) days left, I really need to get my packing done. 

Rumours have started at my work (and by work I mean within the province) that I am leaving for one of two reasons: 1) I am overwhelmed and must flee or 2) I'm pregnant. We've been working to rectify these rumours, as one could be damaging to morale (the overwhelmed). I'm not very concerned about that, though I do note it. What concerns me more (and by "concerns" I mean "irritates") are the statements/questions I've been getting in the along the lines of oh-you're-going-to-live-with-your-husband-you-must-want-babies-now and/or now-you-can-start-a-family. 

I do not appreciate these queries for many reasons, but here are my top two: 
1) I have a family, thank you. 
2) That is, frankly, none of your business.

Within that vein, what concerns me (and, yes, I do mean "concern" now) is my response. When I was first asked these questions I simply laughed and said, "Uh. No." Or, if I was feeling particularly generous, "Not any time soon." Now I'm not very nice, and I've lost my tact--neither of which is intentional. 

Today I said (without a thought as to how this would come across), "No, I have better things to do."

Insert foot in the mouth. Hold until sock taste has fully penetrated back of tongue. Release.

That response was rude, even when said as a statement of fact without malicious intent or tone. Who says that to another person? A person, perhaps, with (a) child(ren) themselves? Bad behaviour on both sides, but while other people may not be able to keep their impolite line of questioning to themselves, I expect better of myself. 

"No, I have better things to do."

Yikes. That statement needs to be quantified and/ or explained if it's to rear its ugly head in public. I *do* have better things to do, or at least activities and/or pursuits that I deem more important at this time of my life. This is not a judgement, but rather a very blunt and honest statement that reveals only me and my current life situation. If, at any point, we decide to have (a) child(ren) then s/he / they will become the "better thing to do." Right now, though, forget about it.

Society is limited by a disgusting lack of imagination. People I know--even those with young people in their lives or a desire for young people--want more than just children; they have more ambition, more beauty, more goals, and more needs than the singular pursuit of growing their families; they understand how much more there is to see and do.

How many times can this be said? Not everyone wants to have children. It's perfectly normal (and increasingly common) to not want to be a parent. Why do we presume this desire? Or, rather, why do people with children (for no one without has asked me yet, if I'm honest) presume everyone must want at least one? Or is *capable* of having children? This presumption is insensate. 

Ugh. I must improve on my tact, but others must stop being so ignorant as well. 

No comments:

Post a Comment