The Long Arm of The Law (part 1)

This isn't a fun post. If you were here to see more comedic takes on the world of online dating, or catch a few laughs on some other absurdity, skip this one. While I don't want this blog to be a compilation of aired grievances, I also don't want to remain quiet and plaster on a happy face in a superficial attempt to keep things positive.

In the past year I've learned more about the state court system than I ever intended. It's a side of reality I'd prefer to avoid, and avoiding things I don't feel like doing is so familiar to me it's almost comfortable. While my oldest daughter was home for her summer break, she and her younger sister drove to the other house to spend time with their father for a few hours. In a moment while they were alone, she asked her younger sister if she still loved their dad. She said no, which set off an alarm in my older kid's head. When they were getting ready to leave, she sent her sister out to the car, my car, to wait while she had a private talk with their father.

That conversation, in which my older kid tried to get him to care about how her younger sister felt fell flat. He rolled his eyes and acted dismissive. Out of frustration, she cursed at him, which he took as permission to slap her across the face. Cursing counted as "disrespect" and to some parents, that's open season for enacting corporal punishment. She left the house, drove to mine, and came upstairs, crying, to tell me what happened. The left side of her face was red.

This was the third instance of my kids going to visit him, and my oldest kid being physically abused. These outbursts never occured while was there. In the aftermath, he usually altered the story to tone it down, or change the narrative. It was unlikely that this time was going to be any different.

"Do you want to do something about it?" I asked from the hallway side of her bedroom door. She was 19, an adult. It wasn't up to me, but it was my responsibility to support her. In this case, she seemed stuck in replaying the moment to consider if there was something she could have done differently that would have prevented him from slapping her.

This is the damage of abuse -- not only are you responsible for your own actions, you believe you're responsible for the actions of the abuser. I've heard it explained as a way to convince yourself you have more control over events and circumstances than you actually do. I told her even though she cursed at him she did not deserve to be hit, and that there was nothing other than self defense that made it acceptable for him to hit her. Shortly after that conversation, her father called and left a voicemail.

...I’m calling to apologize, I’m sorry for slapping you; you understand why, um, but again, I do appreciate the topic and the conversation and bringing up how (your sister) was feeling. I’m very sorry that I hit you and I shouldn’t have. Um, I hope you have a good night. Bye.

His voice was slowed down to a plodding pace, his pronuniciation deliberate, which I suspect he believed would convey sincerity. "You understand why," canceled any real significance to the "apology." We were incredulous at his hope for her to "have a good night." I told her to save the voicemail and send a copy to me.

We called the local police department the following afternoon. Less than 15 minutes later, two black and white Ford Explorers badged with the logo of the county police pulled up and parellel parked on the street in front of my house. Two officers, a man and a woman, in their black uniforms and bullet proof vests arrived to record my daughter's statement. The male officer informed us that their body cameras would be on, and he pulled a small notepad out to capture details. My daughter recounted the story, played the voicemail and noticed the female officer's eyes go wide at the words "you understand why." "That's second degree assault," the male officer said. He produced a sheet of paper with key information for reporting through the county court system. He told my daughter she had a year and a day from the incident to file criminal charges, and separate from that, she could also file for a protective order.

We drove to the district courthouse to file paperwork the following day. I had already taken the day off from work, since the contract was ending and I had time off to burn. We pulled up to the District courthouse, a building I had never entered. It was a block away from the Circuit courthouse, which I was familiar with after serving jury duty ages ago, and again when I had to file the will after my mother died. Unlike the brutalist architecture of the Circuit court, the District dourthouse was airy and open, with a corner facing facade of glass windows. Unlike the carpeted hallways of the circuit court, the flooring was hard, and there were a few stone benches on each floor. We entered and went through security, with bailiffs tasked to ensure we were not carrying weapons or anything unsafe.

The second floor had an office with a long counter with several desk positions for rental disputes, traffic tickets and other inconvenient but not hard core criminal offenses. To the right was a smaller office partitioned with a separate door that had a sign that said "Domestic Violence." My daughter entered, collected the forms she needed to fill out to initiate the protective order and we huddled together to figure it out.

Figuring it out was going to be the recurring theme as we wandered through the legal process. The legal world seems exclusive to our everyday life, even though laws are designed to protect us. There's no clear "How to" manual. I get the same feelings about the financial world, this entity that relies on money, our money, to exist and thrive. These realms come with their own language and processes that feel out of reach until you need them, and when you get there, there is a new language to learn, and distinct steps to take that can feel confusing and intimidating.

We completed the forms, and were told to report to one of the courtrooms. This was also not expected. We took the elevator to the fourth floor, picked a spot among the rows of wooden pews, and waited.

There were a case ahead of us that seemed to be a dispute between a renter and tenant. When my daughter's turn came, she had to go up to the stand and explain why she wanted the protective order. The judge, an older black man, listened, and granted the order. He explained that this order was temporary, and would be valid for one week. We had to go to the nearby sherriff's office to file the temporary order, and return to court if she wanted to file for a protective order with a longer term.

We came home and had a quiet weekend. My sister would be visiting in the upcoming week and the timing gave us something to look forward to. She arrived early on Wednesday (gotta love a SeaTac to BWI red eye!) and we went back to court that Friday.

My daughter spotted her father locking his car as we drove around the courthouse in search of a place to park. He was already seated in the courtroom when we arrived; we chose a row further back, on the opposite side of the aisle. I had to leave to get to a hair appointment. I'd be lying if I didn't admit I was grateful that the timing of my sister's visit allowed her to take my place.

By the time I finished with my haircut, the case was over. I parked and as I made my way back to the courthouse I spotted my ex's car. I also spotted a parking ticket on the windshield, left by the parking enforcement officer who I had seen making his way down the row. I quickly noticed the street parking in the immediate vicinity of the courthouse was limited to two hours with no option to extend. My inner cynic thought, A-ha, it's a trap to drum up business! Based on my limited experience, even the simplest courthouse tasks took longer than two hours. When I reached the door to the courthouse, my ex was leaving, and in his usual way of maintaining the illusion of civility he said something like, "Nice to see you." I don't remember if I said anything back. I went in, went through security and found my sister and my daughter waiting for me outside of the courtroom.

"He charmed the judge, Mommy," were the first words I heard. I was able to share the small victory of the parking ticket he would find on his car, and we cackled and jumped up and down for a few seconds until a man came around the corner and saw us. We collected ourselves and on the drive home I got the rundown.

For each of these court visits, my daughter always hoped the judge would be a woman. The judge for this case was a white woman. My sister chimed in that my ex had put on his boy scout act, and I knew exactly what that meant. Humble, respectful, referring to the judge as "Ma'am," using all of the basic etiquette we learned at West Point. My daughter wanted the order to last eight months, while her father asked for three. The judge had to inform him that he didn't get to decide the term; that was up to his daughter. He also asked about shielding, a process that obscures the court record from public view. My sister noted that the previous case, shielding occurs only after the term of the protective order expires.

"He only cares about protecting his image," my daughter said. I knew what she meant; there would be no true repair, no admission of wrongdoing, no real apology. His concern was focused on erasing any proof that he was on the wrong side of the justice system.

In court, he offered to go to family counseling, and my daughter agreed that it would be okay to stay in contact with him through texting. My daughter also reduced her original request for an eight month term, and went with six months instead. The judge asked how old she was, and she said 19, and with this admission, the judge reminded my daughter to see the good in her father. He also asked to be excused first, bucking the custom that the plaintiff gets to leave before the defendant. He had to return to work. The judge allowed it.

Of course, I thought.

"It's probably better you weren't there," my sister said.

She was right. We're told to give the benefit of the doubt, or that "everyone makes mistakes," but how many trespassings should we allow before calling it a pattern and doing what's necessary to protect ourselves? And what was my daughter supposed to take from this "advice" from the judge? Forgiveness is possible, but for a relationship to survive, accountability and repair is necessary. Where was her advice to him?

We rarely discuss the emotional toll of addressing abuse, the questioning whether we could have done something to achieve a different outcome, the replaying of events to see if the things we contributed warranted the offense. Should you choose to stand up for yourself, you're met with forms to fill out and submit, the task of navigating offices and courtrooms within the court house, and the time it takes to manuever through each step. All of this culminates in an endurance exercise that requires a support network and the ability to ration your own energy appropriately.

I can understand why it can feel easier to do nothing, especially in cases with family members. What happens when you're abused by someone who lives in the same house? Do you "keep the peace" by remaining quiet, and is it really "peace" when your silence is required to survive under the same roof as the person who hurt you?

I didn't think of filing for a protective order, my sister kept saying. There was some healing in her being there; she had not been able to do the same to protect herself against our father when she still lived at home, but she was able to be a stable presence in the courtroom so her niece could feel safe enough to speak up.

When the Battle Picks You

A few weeks ago, when Trump posted that video of Barack and Michelle Obama to social media, the reaction was palpable. One Facebook friend noted that "This was a new low," (I thought, Is it?) Plenty of non-black people denounced it. Discussions took place about not wanting to give the image any more attention, even when speaking up to say posting it was wrong. I noticed not much reaction from black friends, because really? Cartoon apes? In the larger scheme of terrible things about Trump, using a tired old, elementary school level insult dressed up with A.I. is not shocking, or even damaging in comparison to racist laws, being killed by police, or any number of other atrocities from the entire history of this country. Getting angry felt like a waste of energy and it felt like a way to distract us from other horrors unfolding in real time. What are we going to say, exactly? The racist is being racist?

A friend of mine, a white woman I know who leans liberal and tends to be vocal about her political opinions, posted this:

I don't want to include her name because it doesn't matter. She believed the senators on the list should have spoken up to condemn a racist meme. This person was a former coworker, and someone I considered a personal friend. In the two years we got to know each other, we bonded over our shared experiences of getting divorced and raising our kids. She is 15 years older than I am, and she encouraged me, and shared some stories of her own. All that said, I felt compelled to challenge her. That list above, which is cropped, included every black senator who had ever served, to include Barack Obama. The list is pretty short when considering the total number of U.S. senators who are currently serving or who have served in the past. There have been 14 black senators out of a total 2,018 senators to serve this country -- percentage wise that is just shy of 0.7 percent. Against my better judgment, and my usual rule not to get into an argument on Facebook, I said, "Why just these particular senators?"

I got the answer I suspected.

Because they are black.

I appreciate the outrage, but it is futile when we have been trying for decades to tell everyone the racist is racist. New Yorkers tried with the Central Park 5, and housing discrimination. Black people tried to point out the myriad of ways criticism of Barack Obama was unfair, and racist. What happened? We gave attention to a failed businessman turned reality TV star who demanded to see his birth certificate. He won an election after a debate where he proclaimed Haitian immigrants were eating cats and dogs. Without even acknowledging the countless other horrors we have had to witness with this guy, how is anyone surprised he'd post that video? Why should anyone waste their time addressing this?

I noticed in her response she caught herself by acknowledging the white senators needed to speak up. But the main point: the black senators, who comprised not even one percent of the total number of people who had served in the U.S. Senate, had to take the lead. To his credit, Senator Van Hollen understood the assignment:

"In the same way that men need to speak up when women are being victimized," goes completely counter to her original point -- white people weren't being called to speak up, only the victimized black people. I suspected when something happened to women, she wasn't posting that women had to be the first ones to speak up and condemn the mysogyny, so I said this:

She got it. My friend also happens to be the mother to a daughter who is transgender and another child who is queer and nonbinary. She understands the concept of allyship. Why was it hard to extend that thinking to black people? Why was the expectation that they had to lead the charge on speaking up? Why this? In the grand scheme of all of this dude's actions, this A.I. video, to include the gaslighting that a staffer sent it, and that it was a spoof on the Lion King, is pretty minor.

To her credit, my friend owned her mistake and updated her post:

I'd be lying if the side of me that appreciates dark humor didn't laugh over this:

My friend texted me as well, again asking me to please educate her if she was wrong. I don't mind anyone wanting to learn, and I appreciate that more than someone who is content to remain willfully ignorant, but I felt annoyed. Did she not see how it looked to be a white woman demanding that very small group of black people (at least one of whom was dead) speak up over this?

Confrontation feels uncomfortable and can result in exhaustion with no guarantee of understanding. It's a gamble when one's energy is limited and needs to be used wisely. As I get older, I gain a deeper understanding of the saying "Pick your battles." In our texting conversation, I expanded on my point.

Obama was president, so why single out black senators as who *should* speak out?

Why should black people be burdened to point out Trump is racist? We’ve been pointing it out since he was in NYC in the ‘80’s with housing discrimination and the Central Park 5, and again when he made a stink about Obama’s birth certificate. Has anyone listened or cared?

Having white people police their own ranks and be the first and loudest to call it out seems more effective and likely to be heard me than demanding the black senators do it. If someone already thinks we are subhuman, black people declaring racism and begging others to see our humanity is a waste of time and energy that could be used to accomplish other things. And it puts us into the trap of being seen as “the angry black.” Not worth it.

Senator Van Hollen used his privilege to speak up and call it out. Telling black people to call out racism? Have we not been doing that repeatedly and consistently? This is where allyship matters.

Asking me to educate you — you’ve been on this earth longer than I have, you claim to be an empath, you can’t step into my shoes and understand how this looks to me?

To her credit, my friend listened. She owned it, she apologized. I asked her to watch "Becoming" on Netflix. I had recently watched it myself, and I cried watching the sheer number of people who showed up to Michelle Obama's book readings, seeing the high profile people who seemed excited to interview her, and feeling the pure joy of each person who spoke to her as she smiled and signed books. We don't acknowledge often enough that the existence of the Obamas is offensive to every openly (and closeted) racist person that believes they are out of their place. Their success, their joy, their appreciation of, and affection for each other, and the sheer number of people who were buoyed by their time in office summons certain people to react with vitriol. We do not have to accept every invitation to a fight, legitimize every demand to see a birth certificate, or prove we have rightfully earned our place to anyone who has the audacity to ask.

In the end, Barack Obama eventually did respond.

"There's this sort of clown show that's happening in social media and on television," Obama added, describing much of the noise around Trump's presidency as a "distraction."

So did Tim Scott, though I question his assessment that this is the "most racist thing" he's seen out of the White House.

I have had other friends voice their fatigue at being expected to educate others when it comes to race or intersectionality in this country. I have not been put in that position until now, and I'm figuring out how I feel about the entire interaction. My friend followed up by sending a video with a song, which I briefly opened and quickly closed. Along with the song, she texted, "You're more than the struggle."

I don't even know how to respond.

Unhinged

I have once again dipped my toe into the online dating experience; my aim is not to hurry up and go on dates, or land another husband, but to observe, as if I were conducting a social research experiment. This time around I am armed with the "Burned Haystack Dating Method," created by Dr. Jennie Young, which, as the name implies, teaches one to find the needle in a haystack by burning the haystack.

The idea of eliminating as many men as you can based on keeping a keen eye for possible red flags, things that seem icky, and personal preferences seems to go completely against the way women are socialized to keep the door open to any man paying attention to us. It disposes of the ol' "give him a chance" mentality, and encourages being picky. In college, I used to always get accused of being "too picky" as if it were a crime to have standards. Even in my "pickiness" I still chose someone who was widely known as a good guy who has shown himself to be something else. Being picky can does not always protect us from choosing wrong.

I set up my profile on Hinge with the the required six photos and chose my prompts. Within a day I had 39 notifications alerting me that different men on the app had left comments on photos or prompts. As I attempted to sort through the profiles, I got a pop up saying my viewing would be limited because I was not using the app with a paid subscription. Gotta love capitalism!

That's the conflict with these things, it's the dating version of LinkedIn pushing you to the premium membership so you can see the 16 people who viewed your profile. Curiosity is supposed to entice you to pull out that credit card and sign up, and if setting up a subscription is the expectation, do they really want any of us to meet up and delete the app?

With a much more discerning eye, I am using this experience to fine tune what profiles are acceptable. Acceptable isn't the same as good, it means there are no red flags on display given this first glance at a very small amount of information provided.

In no particular order, here are some of my "Do not pass Go, Do not collect $200" criteria:

* Multiple car selfies

* Bathroom selfies

* Unflattering photos. One man posted a photo of himself in a bed wearing a hospital gown and sporting an oxygen tube. A+ for transparency, but what in the seeking a nurse with a purse is taking place, here? There was another who posted a shot of his torso -- no head, no lower legs and feet, which I'm guessing was an attempt at going beyond the basic selfie/headshot, but really, this was the best he could do?

* Every photo includes them wearing sunglasses, a hat, or other accessories of disguise

* Obviously fake names (I kid you not, one man listed himself as "beach bum," and a countless number of black men have gone with the name "King")

* Anyone mid-40's and up "looking to start a family"

* Political views consisting of "conservative," "moderate," "other," "not political" or not making their political views visible. It astounded me how many black men claimed to be "not political." Sir, have you seen the news? Being Switzerland is not a luxury you can afford in 2026. Anyone who doesn't care about (or is committed to) electing officials bent on eliminating the rights of selected segments of the population is a no for me, dawg.

* Any references to their love language being "physical touch" (and 99.9% of the time, those responding to the love language prompt will mention "physical touch"). Also grounds for dismissal: reference to "a woman's touch," "passionate hugs in the kitchen," "cuddling/snuggling," and any declarations that they like good kissing or sex. There is nothing wrong with liking these things; however, this is a dating site profile. Would it be appropriate to declare any of this to a dating prospect when introducing oneself for the first time?

(nice try, I'm not choosing this particular "Bear.")

* Nonmonogamy or "figuring out my relationship type" or checking off all of the relationship options in what should be a single answer

* Low effort, to include poor grammar and spelling, one word responses to prompts, incorrectly responding to prompts, text talk in the age of everyone having easy access to a full keyboard (only Prince could get away with substituting "U" for "you")

You go crazy for Burger's what? What does a burger possess that makes you crazy? Oh the suspense!

* Using prompts to tell me who I should be, challenging me to message you because no one texts on the app, any reference to "No drama." The ones doing this seem to forget the intention should be for them to inform me why I should be interested in them, not a checklist of what I need to be to win them over.

* Anything that has the slightest whiff of fetishism (looking at you, white dude named Jerome, for stating that you "prefer dating outside of (your) culture and race,)" and you, other dude who answered the prompt "I go crazy for..." with "FEET!" Again, is this appropriate to mention in a basic introduction?

Win me over by accepting my fetish which shall not be named

* Anyone lying about his age. Looking at you, Barry, who states he's 58 on his profile:

and then shares within a prompt that he's actually 64.

Can ya believe it folks? Barry saw nothing wrong with lying and attempting to lighten the mood with the ol' aw shucks, but I'm young at heart defense and sealing the deal with a "Woot!" as the youths say. If you'd seen Barry's profile photos, it was not that hard to believe the man was his actual age. The deeper message is that he thinks he's entitled to be a prospect for anyone who filtered out his real age. Barry believes he can convince women who purposely filtered out the 60-somethings to make an exception for him. That "Woot!" is sure to charm the ladies into reconsidering their age limit. Good luck with that, Barry.

A lot of men seemed to be more focused on describing what they want in a woman instead of telling women about themselves. Quite a bit of ordering from the menu style descriptions show up in these prompts, as if they are stacking a bacon double cheeseburger with their favorite toppings. You'll see the words "loyal," "drama free," and "feminine," repeated, along with menu orders for "playful," "fun" and "doesn't take herself too seriously." There are very few asking to meet curious, intelligent, and funny women. Many of them want women who will smile and laugh at their jokes, cuddle on the couch, and join them in their hobbies, to be the cheerleader to their life while not offering to provide the same type of support themselves. They may have better luck adopting a Golden Retriever instead of expecting a constant one directional flow of adoration from a mentally sound adult human being.

"Intellectual Alpha" isn't asking for too much, right? A big booty woman of any race will do.

Or, you know, be a smiling *or* laughing woman dancing freely barefoot -- because that's not in any way unrealistic or delusional:

If those were too much, try being a non-argumentative lady who wears dresses and skirts. At least one man will go crazy for you if you can match his not-too-demanding request.

Or, you know, be a grown up Powerpuff Girl:

Sometimes the descriptions, which, if I understand the concept of these prompts correctly, are intended to show why we should be interested in these men, do the opposite.

I'd have to ensure we have the same understanding of "fun." Is dating like waiting in line or is it the actual ride? Did he really think this was the ideal metaphor to describe dating him? What works for a three minute thrill ride may not be what I want to experience for the duration of a relationship.

And then there's this:

Would I want to date someone who feels like preparing for a test? Is the prompt itself the test? Life is hard enough and in the end, we're all gonna pass anyway (bah-dump-tshhh!)

Speaking of tests, I'd have to "win" this guy over by doing something I hate? Who enjoys subjecting someone they should like to activities they hate? If someone is joining me for something I enjoy, I'd feel terrible if they were enduring something they hated only because they like me. I wouldn't even be able enjoy myself knowing I was burdening someone like that. What is with these sadists men who think suffering and self abandonment are signs of love? This isn't something potentially painful but productive like, say, couples therapy, this is a scary movie, sir. Why wouldn't you just seek someone who, I don't know, actually likes scary movies?

Some descriptions of greatest strengths are not the flexes they think they are.

So you aren't a good listener. Sign me up, said no woman, ever.

So you will always play Devil's advocate when nobody asked for that. Noted.

Some describe themselves and in doing so lapse into telling us what kind of women they like, even if it has nothing to do with the actual prompt.

And he closed it out with that old "as beautiful on the inside as she is on the outside" cliche. Does anyone actually mean this when they say it, or are they trying to sound like they aren't superficial?

This morning I realized one of my favorite current comics, Candy Hearts by Tommy Siegel, uses this type of interpretation in the panels where he mocks dating apps. For years I've been laughing at art imitating life without understanding these very jokes would eventually become a part of my personal reality.

Based on my research so far, I have little expectation that I'll find a match anytime soon; until then I'll burn hay till the needle shines.

When You See How They See You

There are instances in relationships where you get a quick but undeniable glimpse of how the other person sees you. Recently I had a West Point classmate, one I had considered an acquaintance, if not a friend, post several times when Charlie Kirk died. She was adamant that people pray for Charlie Kirk, and insistent that violence on "the left" had to stop. Instead of quietly unfriending, I made the error of engaging. I said it was "disingenuous to ignore that many of this man's opinions were hateful and sowed hatred among his followers for people who did not match their demographic." This friend was a white woman, and she was a Charlie Kirk follower? I only knew about him because my oldest daughter couldn't stand his shit stirring "debate" tactics and shared the opinions that bothered her. This "friend" felt so strongly that she was compelled to ask her friends to pray for a man who stated:

"If we would have said three weeks ago [...] that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative-action picks, we would have been called racist. But now they're comin' out and they're saying it for us! They're comin' out and they're saying, "I'm only here because of affirmative action.

Yeah, we know. You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person's slot to go be taken somewhat seriously."

Seeing which people demanded sympathy for someone so open with his bigotry caused me to wonder how they saw me, to include this so-called "friend." It isn't a huge jump to then wonder if person didn't believe I got into West Point fairly. The kicker is, you'll never get the an honest answer. These friends didn't welcome the discussion or try to understand why someone like him was problematic to someone like me. They didn't want to address direct quotes by saying he was killed for his opinions and insisting that his words were taken "out of context."

Every West Point cadet who wasn't white or male has been accused of "taking someone's slot." The unsaid part: that particular "someone" was white and male, the demographic that, by default, was assumed to be automatically qualified and entitled to fill the thousand or so admission slots every year. Anyone not fitting that demographic, to include this "friend," was assumed to be unqualified and unworthy and only there for the optics. Every woman I knew who attended West Point had encountered male peers that hinted that they had "taken someone's slot." How did this "friend" see me? Did she think I "took someone's slot?" If she followed Charlie Kirk, was she in agreement with the opinions he declared as facts, to include who lacked the brain processing power to be taken seriously? When I confronted her, she did not want to have the discussion, and I did what I should have done in the first place: hit the "unfriend" button.

I had a moment of realization with my ex spouse, too. He was curious about people I had dated before we had connected. And, he shared a story about himself, too. He'd gone to a club with friends and a woman was interested in him. He remembered being annoyed with a friend who had also been at the club that night. The woman interested in my ex was this particular friend's "type," a white woman with red hair, and the friend felt he should have been the one to pursue this person. My ex felt annoyed at the friend's presumption, and I doubt it was because he recognized the sexism in the assumption that this woman should automatically be awarded to the redhead loving buddy. It was more likely that his ego was bruised because his friend believed himself to be the better choice and felt entitled to pair up with a woman who was his "type." That aside, she was a little older, and had her own home not too far from West Point, which my ex visited for sexy times. That concluded his storytelling.

My story was less scandalous. I had met "Wade" at a party following Penn Relays during my senior year. He seemed enamored and a little bit drunk, and wanted to kiss me, but respected that I wasn't willing. We wound up exchanging numbers and agreed to meet. Our date was on a Saturday afternoon, and I met him in Grand Central Station after taking the Metro North into the city from Garrison, the train station that was directly across the Hudson River from West Point. The date was fairly tame -- a quick visit to his apartment, which was walking distance from Grand Central Station. His roommate was out of town but his father was visiting. I was my usual awkward self and we went off to do the worst first date activity one could possibly choose: we went to the movies. The movie? Chasing Amy. Like the time I saw Pulp Fiction, I had no idea what I was walking into; we didn't have extensive access to movie reviews. This felt like a movie worthy of discussion, but not with someone I had just met. There was no second date. Wade was nice enough -- he was a Duke graduate and a Kappa Alpha Psi fraternity member with a job at Bausch and Lomb. Wade was attractive and looked good on paper but there was no there there.

My ex never got to hear the whole (much tamer than his) story. Why? Because I didn't get past sharing that I had taken the train into Manhattan alone. He stopped me so abruptly you could have inserted a record scratch after I described my way of getting into the city.

"Trish didn't go with you?"

At the time, I was 21 years old. Why would my closest friend accompany me for a (checks notes) date?

"Why would Trish go with me?"

"Because it's New York."

It was a Saturday afternoon in the spring. You couldn't get more out in broad daylight than that. We were meeting in a very open public space. None of his "concern" was computing. On top of that, he had openly shared that he had gone to some woman's house alone, and without a chaperone friend. Why was it fine for him but not for me?

I said, "I'm sure if you had a date in New York you would have figured out how to get yourself there." I wasn't about to buy into this fable that the big city was oh so scary.

He settled into the fear mongering. You didn't know this guy. Going alone wasn't safe. Something could have happened to you. He couldn't admit he was being completely absurd and clinging to an obvious double standard.

I flipped it by saying his club going sexy times friend could have accused him of rape. After all, he had visited her house without a buddy. Why was that okay, but for me (checks notes), meeting someone in the middle of a huge and very public train station, going to the movies, and returning to the gray granite walls of Bradley Barracks well before sunset was unsafe.

My conclusion: he didn't see me the way he saw himself. His decisions were sound and valid while mine were half baked and ill conceived. He had complete agency and I needed hand holding to keep me out of trouble. At the time I went on this date, I was less than two months from graduating from West Point and being commissioned as an Army officer who would be trusted with millions of dollars of equipment and responsible for the lives of 30 human beings.

This opinion of me cropped up repeatedly. My love of the Cure? My best friend Heather must have swayed me into liking their music; it was unlikely to him that I discovered this English post punk band and decided I liked them all by myself. Wanting to divorce? The couples therapist must have pushed me in that direction; I couldn't possibly have arrived there without someone whispering in my ear. There's nothing more insulting than being seen as not having a mind of your own by the person you once wanted to share your life with.

If he believed me to be so feeble minded, then what did he see in me? Did he marry me because he thought I didn't possess the brain processing power to be taken seriously? Was I seen as "wife material" (sidenote: ew) because he believed he could influence me? For a long time he did influence me, but at the time of this conversation (circa 2019) I was looking for the exit. The root issue in our marriage was laid bare by what each of us shared about our dating excursions -- I listened to his story in its entirety while I never got to share mine because we he got stuck on me taking the train as a 21 year old college senior (checks notes) all by myself. We didn't connect because he didn't have it in him to get to any of the interesting bits of my experience in the very conversation that he initiated!

Was I naive? I was naive in buying the story that he told about himself, that he was a good guy who tried to do the right things. I was naive for putting too much trust into someone who didn't seem to believe that my agency as a human being was every bit as valid as his.

When the 'Ship Sinks

I'm not one for New Year resolutions; they often feel like a set up for failure paired with aspirational thinking based on a script of what we are supposed to want for ourselves: Lose weight, scroll less, eat healthy. I recently completed a ritual that required me to identify what I wanted to leave behind in 2025. I noted that I wanted to leave behind unintentional people, people who are careless with me, people who do not repair, and situations where I am undervalued. Being able to define these things comes from experiences with people who fell short but somehow still felt entitled to call me their friend. It can seem very obvious that no one wants unintentional, careless, non-repairing people who don't value them around, but enforcing these standards requires exercising muscles that are uncomfortable to flex.

As I get older, I find that I don't have the energy to react on the spot the way I did in my twenties. Sometimes I need a moment to process my feelings and determine how I want to move forward. Early in 2025 someone I considered a close friend posted a reel in a group chat shared with two other friends. The video was of a white woman flopping onto her bed and bouncing off to fall onto the floor. The caption? "When you can't drop your kids off for the weekend at their dads [sic] because you picked the good guy and you're in a loving happy marriage." I guess that's good for a couple of yuks and I have no doubt that was her mindset when she sent it, but as someone newly divorced who had to contend with a kid who disliked leaving my house to stay with her dad, it hurt. The message that divorced mothers have it easy by getting a "break" and leaving the kids with their dad, paired with the smugness of "I picked the good guy and I'm in a loving happy marriage," compounded with this message being passed off as a joke by a person who I'd considered a friend for decades? It fucking hurt.

I spoke up in the group chat -- gently at first -- with, "I admit, I don't get what's funny. As a now single parent it rubs me the wrong way." The response? "I'm sorry it rubbed u [sic] the wrong way."

Anyone familiar with an apology knows this falls under the "I'm sorry you were offended" category of non-apologies. The appalling part: this was the only other friend in our group that had experienced divorce, and she had also talked at length about the importance of impact vs. intent and identifying said non-apologies. I tried relating and empathizing with her, but found myself losing sleep over her response. I replied again, just after 3 a.m. "I have to say this. That's a non-apology. That's a "I'm sorry you got offended." I went on to say that I was hurt because she knew what I was going through and that it wasn't funny.

She did apologize sincerely, but only time, and observing if there is changed behavior, empathy, care and consideration, can help when deciding to keep letting someone in. Often we accuse people of holding a grudge; we tell them to "get over it." We use the sunk cost fallacy -- the years invested in a relationship -- as reason for them to "just let it go." We tell people to "be the bigger person." We gently shame the people on the wrong side of the equation under the guise of keeping the peace. We don't give much weight to whether someone is no longer in alignment with what we expect of our friends, and we also tell people to expect less from their relationships to spare themselves from the resentment of unmet needs. Why is there so much burden placed on those who are harmed? Why do we push for forgiveness while sparing offenders from actively repairing the damage they caused? Who does this benefit?

Over time I remained friendly, but felt guarded, and not eager to share much of what was going on in my life. I retreated from the group chat. Is this how it goes in adulthood? It's often summed up in a quote that some friends are with you for a season. The tricky part is understanding that even friendships you assumed would be life long will end in ways you didn't see coming. It doesn't mean the friendship was imagined or fake, but that its course has run. I'm sad, but sadness is not reason enough to compromise on how I want to be treated. This friend is the person who succintly pointed out that someone may not have a bad intention, but not having bad intentions is not the same as having good intentions; this was a groundbreaking realization that I had not considered. I didn't expect her to be the same person who would demonstrate this to me.

The defining moment was watching that reel, speaking up about it, receiving a non-apology, pointing out the non-apology, and then getting what seemed like a genuine apology. It felt like too much work for basic empathy and consideration from someone who knew me and knew what I was going through. Time has shown me that my trust in this friend is damaged, and there may never be a repair. This person was my roommate in my last two years at West Point. We didn't stay in touch during her first marriage but we reconnected early into her second marriage. I visited when she was pregnant, and she and her husband treated me to a walking tour of Boston. The morning I was due to fly out, she went into labor, and they still managed to drop me off at the airport on their rush to the hospital. The baby born the day I flew out is a college freshman. This was no short term connection, yet I no longer feel compelled to stay connected. I don't wish anything ill on her; I don't want a fight to clear the air. I want to shift my energy towards becoming what I seek in others: being intentional, showing care, being able to repair damage I've caused and valuing others. I'm grateful for the jokes we shared and the discussions we had, and I also recognize that "letting it go" can mean letting go of friendships that no longer feel safe.

Santa's Secret

Every year I ask my kids to give me a list of things they would like for Christmas. In the beginning it was a list to give to Santa, but both of them have long since aged out. My younger kid believed in Santa until she was about eight years old. I tend to think she wanted to believe at that point, because when her older sister pressed, her belief morphed into believing in the "spirit of Santa." We aren't religious, so the holiday wasn't centered on Christianity or going to church, but instead spending time together and exchanging gifts.

My younger kid had only one item on her list: an upgraded version of her portable gaming system, which had a fairly hefty pricetag. I struggled with this as unemployment means more money is flowing out than coming in. I told her I could get it for her, however she may have to wait until after Christmas.

Meanwhile, my older kid provided a lengthy list of not-too-expensive things. What I didn't expect was that the older kid would try to convince my younger kid to ask for an older handheld gaming system that isn't manufactured anymore. Later, in moments when my older kid wasn't around, the younger one would come into my room and share that she knew what her sister actually wanted: the no-longer-manufactured handheld gaming device. The device wasn't on the older kid's list, but her persistence in trying to convince her younger sister to get one served as a glaring hint.

When her dad asked if she wanted an updated version of her gaming system, she quickly devised a plan: she would ask him for the no-longer-manufactured handheld gaming device instead. My younger kid made quick work of looking up used devices and when she found one that fit her specifications, she sent the link to her dad. She intended to regift this handheld system to her sister while knowing that she would not receive her gift on Christmas. She could have easily asked him for her gaming system and moved on; she was more motivated to surprise her sister.

Given events that I won't get into just yet (stay tuned for that), my younger kid has not been eager to spend time with her dad. When he reached out to plan their gift exchange, she agreed to it, knowing it was a necessary step to acquiring her sister's gift. They went out to lunch, exchanged gifts, spent time together, and she came home, victorious. "She has no idea" my younger kid would say, as a sly smile spread across her face. She was so pleased with her cleverness and the use of deception for good.

I don't necessarily condone deception, however Santa Claus is an elaborate hoax that adults perpetuate year after year. My sister described a feeling of outrage and betrayal upon discovering the big lie, to the point that she spoiled the secret for me when I was only five years old. I could expand this to say the adoption of pagan traditions, and placing Jesus's birthday suspiciously close to the winter solstice on the calendar is another example of that deception, but that ground has been covered. So, the disclaimer is, deception is okay if it's done for good and ultimately does not cause harm.

In early December I opened a letter from my home loan company which contained a check compensating me for the excess in my escrow account. This amount was close enough to the amount of money I needed to buy the updated version of my younger kid's gaming system. A quick online search showed me which retailer had the best price and in minutes I purchased the new system.

We exchanged gifts on Christmas Eve, and even then, in front of her sister, my younger kid proclaimed, "She has no idea!" "And neither do you," I thought.

We opened our gifts. Weeks earlier, my younger kid handed her phone to her sister so her sister could read a text exchange between her and her dad. The younger kid nearly had a meltdown when she realized the link and discussion to purchase the haldheld gaming system were in the text conversation, and for a moment she worried that her sister had seen it. She hadn't. She was completely surprised by the gift and immediately turned it on and began toying with it.

My younger kid opened her gift and was also completely surprised to discover the replacement to her portable gaming system. I had never given her a time when she could expect to receive her gift, and she didn't know circumstances changed and I had some financial breathing room to buy it.

Sometimes these tests of character show up without any set up or orchestration. Learning that Santa Claus isn't real isn't the only shift in maturing at Christmas. Another shift is when kids are less excited about what gifts they'll open and more excited about giving a thoughtful gift to someone they love. My younger kid could have easily gone for the certainty of getting the gift she wanted by delegating the task to her dad. She was willing to postpone her own gift indefinitely and prioritized getting a gift for her sister instead. I would be dishonest if I took credit for her actions, and I don't know if the 14-year old me would have been selfless enough to forego a gift I wanted so my sister could get the gift she didn't expect and didn't outright request. As a parent, witnessing the evolution of a kid who was once excited to get gifts from Santa to one who was more excited to surprise her sister was the gift I never anticipated.