zebras don't change their spots

I recently decided that chick-flicks annoy me. Part of it is the glamorization of womanizing. I just watched Made of Honor, which besides being a hodge-podge of every obnoxious movie plot, made me hate romantic comedies. The main character is a slut, never sleeping with the same woman twice in a row. We accept this because he is a man, and his father has taught him to be this way (and in other movies it is adorable because his promiscuity is a result of a broken heart). And somehow we as the audience are supposed to hope that he gets the girl in the end. He's completely commitment phobic, but now he's in love with the best friend that he marginalized for a decade. We're supposed to find it romantic that he loves the one he never slept with, that now he's changed. That's what chick-flicks promote: the romance of love-inspired change. It's a testimony to how much the guy loves the girl that he could give up his wicked ways. Then it doesn't matter that he is a slut, or a drinker, or a gambler, or violent. He'll change because, girl, you changed him. Feel blessed, feel loved, and feel confident in his continued fidelity.

Bull. Shit.

My first question is, how do you know that you're the one he really changed for or the one he can't change for? In every chick-flick there are multiple failures before the happily ever after. This is true of women as well as men. The same example of Made of Honor is that she was completely in love with this Scottish Duke but then made a split-second decision at the altar to be with the New York Slut instead. I admit, Patrick Dempsey is hot, but the twist annoys me. Why is this one supposed to work, when the previous attempts have failed? What changed? The answer: nothing. The only difference is that the movie is over. That's what cues the actors and the audience that the happily ever after has arrived. Take any romantic comedy, and the actors are in previous relationships where they think they have found "the one" until something comes along to hurt that, nothing that is the protagonist's fault, of course. So, given their previous security and bliss, followed by utter ruination, what's to say that this time won't be exactly like that?

Cynical you say? Maybe.

There is an answer. The reason you feel secure is because you establish a new pattern. You have to judge the future based on the past. Because of this, some people are afraid to get hurt again, since that is their pattern, but others find the ability to trust someone else based on the pattern of their behavior. That's what John Cusack movies use to help him get the girl: he has a pattern of being hopelessly devoted. If you fall in love with John Cusack, you are safe. So see, I am not against romance; I am against idiocy. I am against choosing the slut, the adventurer, the workaholic, the married man, the liar, the flake. Yet protagonists, fictional and real, do it, because their egocentric attitudes tell them that they are the ones these profligates will change for.

Prove it.

I am not against change. I believe that it can happen, that it can be a true sincere change. And I do believe that love can be the catalyst. I just think that it doesn't happen as much as we would like to believe. Nor as easily. Maybe I am basing this on my patterns of behavior: I fall into the same rote time and again, and it is damn hard for me to break my habits, especially when it comes to how I related to others. Sometimes, I make a really good start, a determined sprint, and then I lose the drive, motivation or ability. When the change is real, it comes slowly, painfully and with conscious effort and attention to the small things. It's like diet and exercise: the grapefruit juice diet leads to binging, while walking a couple blocks a day is likely to stick. I believe in small changes.

I would still hedge my bets.

I don't approve of saying when..., as in, it will be better when... I will be happy when... That's the current code of my life, because I have been so unhappy, clinging to the idea that this will go away when... and that's where I get pissed off. If I am not happy now, I will not be happy when.... So while changes happen, even big changes, common sense dictates that you do not bet on them. The pattern shows that he is faithful and kind, as opposed to, he will be faithful and kind when...

Some patterns are easy to recognize. There are some easy color or number patterns, where you can see 2,4,6 and 8 are going to lead to 10. Correlative patterns are harder. She becomes irrational and moody every four weeks :: she is a werewolf. Maybe his bad mood coincides with BYU football losses and it's not the fact that you brought up bills. So, yes, I do believe in situational factors. Maybe he is distant because there is more stress at work and he really will be better when... But again, to know this, one has to see the pattern that suggests he is usually very much attentive when he is not so burdened. Because maybe he is just distant and nothing is going to change that.

I said that I am good at seeing patterns. And I am. But sometimes in my own life, I cannot see as clearly. I am going to counseling for this reason. I keep journals and reread them so I can better see the patterns in my life. I also get an earful of it from my friends. When several friends offer the same criticism or advice, I begin to see a pattern in their concern, a concern that might be worth noticing. Right now, their concerns seem to revolve around the same thing: my stubborn blindness toward certain patterns in others.

to be continued...