It's been a while since I started a topic like this, about a common dramatic trope that I don't understand...but this one has been on my mind for a while recently.
So you've probably all seen at least one instance of this, if you've watched any series starring adults in a relationship: where one partner (usually a man, and the MC) has a dangerous career where they're constantly risking their life and/or getting injured on the job, and the other partner (usually a woman) is always waiting at home worrying about them, until one day they can't take the stress anymore and say something like "it's either your job or me", and threaten to leave them if they don't find something less dangerous to do. Or, y'know, sometimes they just walk out without even giving them an ultimatum. =/
And this is so puzzling to me...because on the surface, it makes sense. If something is causing you nothing but grief and worry, you get it out of your life, right? If you had to choose between loving something that was always on the verge of being taken from you, and not knowing about its existence at all, it's not unreasonable to want to save yourself the heartache and choose Option B.
But is that...actually feasible? Especially when it comes to, like, a living human person you already know and love???
Personally, the confusion always comes from imagining myself in that situation, and not really understanding the benefit of choosing Option B. So I can keep this person in my life and go on having to worry about them all the time, or I can cut them out of my life and then just...magically stop worrying about them?? '~' No, I'd still be worried about them; I just wouldn't be around to help them anymore, or even to get regular updates on how they're doing...which would probably just cause me even more stress. 'Out of sight, out of mind' usually doesn't apply when a loved one's life is in danger...
The only way it could work IMO is if you were to make the decision, and then psychologically condition yourself to STOP caring about this person's wellbeing. Like, every time you're reminded of them, or you start to wonder how they're doing, think about calling them to ask how things are going, you gotta slap yourself on the wrist and say 'NO'...and keep doing that until someone you once loved, and honestly never stopped loving, becomes meaningless to you.
That...doesn't sound better. :[ Even if I could successfully complete the process, I wouldn't feel good about doing it at all. It'd be like cutting off your leg to escape from a bear trap. Like, you escaped, and it's for the better, but you still had to saw off your own leg, and that in and of itself is a trauma.
It's a choice between one awful thing and another...and personally, I don't think loving someone in a dangerous profession is the same thing as being stuck in a bear trap, where literally cutting off a part of yourself would be the better option.
The worst thing about this trope is that it's usually NOT a situation like Breaking Bad or something where the MC is totally out of control, and refusing every better and safer option to get what they want, and not even a great person anyway, from a moral standpoint. Honestly, getting away from someone like that is as much about YOUR safety as it is about theirs...
No, usually this trope is used when the MC is a pure and selfless hero, who chooses to sacrifice themselves to help others and keep everyone safe, doing something they believe is right and that someone HAS to be willing to do. And then it's like, "uh oh, here comes his annoying GIRLFRIEND to make him stop because of her 'feelings' or whatever, because women can't understand things and are too weak and cowardly to take risks! Let's spend multiple episodes on this irritating drama because...idk it's supposedly compelling for some reason, even though we ALL know we're just going to return to the status quo eventually because that's the premise of the series!"
And it's gotten to the point where apparently a lot of people viewed Breaking Bad's character drama through that (ridiculously inappropriate) lens, just because that's how this conflict is USUALLY written...but enough about a show I've never watched. ^^; The point is, that very common and very annoying setup for this trope just makes it even harder to see Option B as 'escaping a bear trap'.
Like, you've got a committed relationship to a genuinely loving and nice guy, who's doing a GOOD thing that just happens to be something that might get him hurt...and it's not that you don't love him back; you DO. But because you might lose him someday, and you can't accept living in that reality...you need to lose him right away...???
You need to just get it over with, rip off the bandaid...despite knowing, logically, that this nice and kind person is still out there, but you personally refuse to acknowledge their existence because it might cause you some pain? And you also have to convince yourself to not care that they're helping people, not care that they're living up to their ideals, not care that their work is important to them and to others, and not care that they might miss you and you might miss them...you just have to reject it all, throw it all in the garbage, find yourself someone new...all for the illusion of being with someone who will "always be there for you".
It just...doesn't sound good to me. It doesn't sound better. It's not a stupid or unreasonable way to think, but it doesn't sound like the better option. And although the women who go through this dilemma are often portrayed in a dismissive light...it's still held up as a positive alternative to their current relationship, something they're 'giving up' to stay with MC-guy. And I'm just wondering why.
created
Feb '23
last reply
Mar '23
- 9
replies
- 746
views
- 7
users
- 15
likes