Brrn

I have a problem when people say someone has too much time on their hands. There was some contest on this channel where fans had to design a "bump" for them (an ad is the best approximation I can think of). When the time comes to reveal the winner, it's "someone who has way too much time on their hands." That example was a stupid joke, but the way they use phrase is still the same-- assumptive. I don't like it.

One day, at an appointment with my therapist (I'm required to see one while on "psychiatric" medication), I was trying to explain an idea, and it didn't come out exactly right, but it was something about the prioritization of our society's values, how I didn't like them, and how I didn't feel obligated to get a shitty job just because I lived at home. She didn't disguise her reaction very well, because her whole response, despite whatever she actually said, read as "You need to grow up." I was surprised at the response, but unlike my therapist, I did not show it.

You, dear therapist, need to be aware that though our values are different, that neither of ours are inherently better. Secondly, I feel that what you consider to be "responsible" is empty. Somehow, according to your (and many others') idea of what a responsible adult does, I was doing great while I was working. And that it's a shame that I stopped. Somehow, the fact that I was, at first, miserable, and later, just as miserable, but USED to being that way, covered in bleach and whatever else leaked out of those soggy boxes, was LESS important than the fact I was working.

Yeah yeah, economy. I was fortunate to have employment. For the first time, I had my own money. I got what I was supposed to out of that job. But it speaks volumes about us when the job, and whether or not you have it, matters more than you. Obligations do factor in, but as someone who doesn't have any, I'm done catching all the flak.

Maslow's hierarchy of human needs lists self-actualization at the top of a pyramid, sitting on physical and emotional stability. "Having a job" addresses basic needs. Gotta have money for food and shelter. "Entertainment" too (internet, books, whatever), but it doesn't cover higher needs, the ones we require to grow as people. That's why, for people who just get minimum wage, knuckle-dragging, field slave jobs their whole lives, being employed should stop being glorified. It's for purely existing.

Growth, growth is what has value (to me, that is). That's why I'm going to OCC now. Eastern was a bad decision because I had no idea what I wanted. The Academy of Art was a bad idea because I did it on a lark. I remember saying to Fr. Henry "Is there a job where I can just learn the rest of my life?" And that's why I quit Family Dollar. I realized the only way I was gonna be happy was to keep learning. But at least by this point I found a direction.

Still, nowhere in there is a plan on how to get out of work. It's inevitable, I would be naive to think otherwise. The trick is to pick something that is interesting, not like work, or at least really tolerable. My hope is research. If that fails, then college-level teaching. If that fails, I'll get a doctorate and retry those steps. If that fails, I'll teach English to Japanese people. If that fails, I'll write a book. That still has potential to fail, but if I bullshit convincingly enough, I have a shot. But I will not, WILL NOT be a field slave anymore. It's all house-work for me from now on. I would hate to go back to that, to re-zombify, to shut my mind off just to get through a day. No way in hell.

Sean