Monday, March 20, 2006

A Little Agency Goes a Long Way.

For some reason I'd like to talk about agency.
It seems like a good concept,
at least in theory it does.
But so many people seem to have a problem with it.

Let's examine for a moment the principle of Agency in relationships.

Let me start by stating my basic premise:
I believe people ought to be able to exercise their agency,
especially when it comes to important circumstances, such as
Relationships. I believe that no one and nothing should be able to,
or be forced to take it from you. I believe people should and can be happy with their decisions.

Sometimes however people seem to think that Agency is good as long as it benefits me.

Example: Many girls just happen to live in the same place.
(some people call them apartments)
These girls are hetrosexual, and thus would date guys.
These girls know a guy.
Which girls does he date?

Obviously this is a stupid question.
and yet at this point many people would answer it.

Lets assume that this guy does date, at least sometimes maybe.
So here's the question. Should he decide or should they decide?
Should he pick one? or does he even have to pick?
Or do they vote on it. Maybe date through democracy.
(hey democracy's not that bad, I mean look at America, Slick willy was very bright,
and G W at least has some morals.

Or perhaps we could play this a different way.
Maybe it should be first come first served.

How about this one girl selects this guy as hers, then clearly shares this idea with everyone.
Everyone that is except the guy, that would be a sin.

Months even years may go by but some how this guy has to use his telepathy to figure out that he is supposed to be dating this girl. She may be his type, and she may not, but that is not his to decide, at least not yet.

I hope this has never happened to you, cause if you ask me it sounds ludicrous.

So who does he date?
well who does he want to date?
And who is showing interest? Not in a subtle way,
because most of us guys don't do as well with the subtlety as girls do.

And once again why is anyone deciding at this point?

It seems that there is a much more logical method.
If he has any possible interest in someone, he should go out with them.
Once he has done this, he should still be able to go out with any of them.
He should go out with any, and or all of them,
to the extent of his, and her desires.

each and everyone of them should have equal right to choose,
and equal responsiblity to choose, who they will and will not date.

Let's face it after one date you don't often know very much.
So really none of them has any right of assumption.

Of course, once again there is an easier way.
and yes it involves talking, so for those of us who have trouble commuincating with members of the opposite sex, it may not be that much easier,
but, still better.

But here's the thing.
When a person makes a decision. Basically everyone should support it.
let me explain.
Say a guy chooses that he likes a girl.
if she feels the same way,
she should support his decision.

If she does not like him, and cannot foresee liking him, he should support her decision.
After all, how much can you really love a person, if you don't want what makes them happy.

Sometimes, it takes time, but so what?

So here I say it: What ever happened to agency?
Don't we believe in that anymore?
Why can't we make our own decisions?
Why can't they be more informed?
Why don't we want everyone to be happy?
And why can't we be happy independant of their choices?

A little agency goes a long way, but why can't we support it, whether we think we like the outcome or not.

13 comments:

Cardine said...

I feel as though the dates (meaning month, day, year, hour, minute) of the posts on your blog are misleading. You didn't post this on Monday. I know because I've been checking it everyday, and it hasn't shown up until today. Same goes with the last post.

I was not aware that there was a problem with agency in dating. I don't know anyone who has been forced into dating or not dating.

Anonymous said...

I didn't quite understand the agency issue, but you can take this for what it's worth:

In the case of my parents and several others... it's not uncommon for someone to end up marrying the roommate of the person they had previously dated.

warnser said...

(first let me say my keyboard is weird) i don"t intend anything on my blog to be misleading

but it just write as much as i have time for< and then i save it< so i can finish when i have time>

i think more often than being forced into dating someone< we are forced into not dating them>

and while the problem of agency may not be epidemic<
i think there is still some weakness in our system>

but agency is not merely choice< agency deals with knowledge too>

i imagine this was another one of my well thought out blogs< that i didn"t proofread< so it doesn"t make as much sense to you as it does to me>

it"s true some people are cool with agency<
and sometimes a person can marry a roommate (see comment)
but it isn't the only method,
and it often creates some good ole fashioned tension.

Cardine said...

I am unclear as to how a person is forced into not dating someone. It would seem to me that not dating someone is a choice on both peoples' parts. If a guy or girl asks someone out, then the only foreseeable way in which I suppose they would be "forced" into not dating is if one of them says no. And then that's a choice. And if they don't ask each other out, that is a choice, too.

I agree that we each should have a choice on who we date. And I think it tends to work pretty well how it is, even if you are frustrated that people are making "uninformed" decisions. I think that people can become informed if they want. That is also agency. Agency to me = making decisions based on the information that a person has.

tearese said...

truly you have a dizzying intelect.

tearese said...

you know, Joseph went out with tons of girls from his ward (I guess), and many were roomates with each other. HE felt that he had been commanded to date, so he better do it. And he had fun too. Unfortunately, this got him a reputation as a 'player' in his ward.
Fortunately, I knew nothing about this before our first date. (And after that, he never went out with anyone else)

warnser said...

Foreced seems like a word, perhaps too strong. And maybe you haven't seen it, but I have seen times, where both parties would like to date each other, and yet one chooses not to... it would seem that the reasons are social. So while the person still has the ability to make their own decision, sometimes people make decision, that they might not make in other circumstances.

BTW it makes me dizzy too.

warnser said...

Thanks for the illustration Tearese.
I think it supports my thought process.

I guess part of what I'm saying is why should he be labeled, for doing what he was told to do. It doesn't sound like he was a player at all. It sounds like he's just good. I think that is illustrated well by your parenthetical.

tearese said...

oooo parenthetical. now I feel smart.

Cassie said...

I think when it comes to relationships which are complicated themselves, its easier to not add to more complications in your living situation. I believe that it does happen that a person would want to date someone that their roommate dated but if it would be too painful or uncomfortable for that roommate to see you dating the person they had dated then I think it is okay, out of respect for the feelings of your roommate (that is if you like your roommate and really do respect her feelings)to say no to the asker. Obviously it is just not the right time for you two to date.

warnser said...

I appreciate your comment.

So if the right time came along who would decide, and how would they know?

Cassie said...

I think it would just have to be a sort of mutual feeling.

warnser said...

Ah yes a mutual feeling,
I once heard that everything is better without words.
Ü

But seriously, how would you ever know that the feeling was mutual.