Blog post: Tridimity: Appropriateness

Thank you for taking the time to read this, the first ever blog post of the asocialite. I would ask that you do not read it naked, mind, as that is inappropriate. What does it mean for something to be ‘inappropriate’? I think it boils down to the fact that we are expected by fragments of our human environment, or society, to behave in a particular manner at a particular point in time. Defiance of the societal expectations leads to an action being deemed ‘inappropriate’. We have become so unconscious of the fact that our free will – whatever bit has been left to us outside of genetic determinism - has been eroded by the unspoken and ever imprinted societal conventions, that it borders on the absurd.

Strawberry jelly for breakfast, anyone? Why is it that strawberry jelly is not an appropriate selection at breakfast time? Well, there might be sound reasons; reasons relating to the relative nutritional benefits of strawberry jelly versus cereal or toast or fruit, for example. One will not know until one either asks somebody else or asks oneself or – better still – tries it for oneself. There is also one facile reason, namely, ‘because others expect strawberry jelly not to be consumed at breakfast time’. In determining what is and is not appropriate, it is entirely possible to reach the same conclusions for different reasons. For example, theists might reach the conclusion that sexual promiscuity is not an appropriate behaviour, secondarily to an appeal to authority, tradition and faith (what is the formal position of my Church? What would my ancestors do?); whereas, an atheist may reach the conclusion that sexual promiscuity is not an appropriate behaviour, because it tends to be associated with increased rates of sexually transmitted infections, unwanted pregnancy, emotional suffering and relationship breakdown. The conclusion is the same, but the reasoning is diametrically opposite, and for that reason – in my opinion – the former belief is not worthy of respect, while the latter is worthy of respect. Indeed, I would rather respect a belief in sexual promiscuity that is based on an individual’s own well-considered independent reasoning than to respect a belief against sexual promiscuity that is based on appeal to authority, tradition or faith. In order to care about somebody else’s opinion of us, we must first respect that person’s line of reasoning and means of generating those opinions.

There are, of course, occasions when life choices of great import must be considered. In 1952, it came to light that the luminary Mathematician and Computer Scientist, Alan Turing, had engaged in a homosexual relationship with Arnold Murray. At the time, homosexuality was deemed not just ‘inappropriate’ but illegal – Turing chose to undergo chemical castration as an alternative to prison, and tragically died following ingestion of cyanide in what is thought to have been suicide. If only Turing had been sufficiently independent of public opinion as to realise that the whispers of the morally hypocritical half-wit masses do not matter one jot, then perhaps the world would have been a little richer for the presence of our venerable genius.

The last time I checked, babies were born quite free and without social agenda – it is only through conditioning that our perceptions and behaviours are chained. There are too many external agencies that readily inform us, as if they were some fount of knowledge, who we are and who we are not; who we may and may not become. Liberation from the chains is possible: get acquainted with your own voice and let independent reason be your supreme guide. Nobody owns your personal identity but you. Your life is too brief to be spent living as an anxious mirror of the expectations of society.

When in Reception class at Primary School, I was instructed one day to move on from playing in the sand pit to play in the dollhouse, and I flatly rejected as the former, so it seemed to me, was preferable. ‘Ah, but what are you going to do when you are an adult?’ asked my teacher. ‘I will do whatever the hell I want’, I thought to myself. Nowadays I temper that internal response with the caveat, ‘so long as it does not harm others’ – and I am very much living by this creed. I am going to love whomever I want to love.

Read and comment on the full post