I consider myself a bay area gal through and through. El Hombre and I often joke and bicker about what that means - clearly not everyone in the bay area is exactly like. But there are some characteristics that I generally associate with the bay area:
1. Yuppie Hippies - example: one out of four people in San Francisco graduated from a top university and work in an entirely yuppie profession such as finance, law, medicine, or a start-up about to IPO, yet think they are hippies because they shop at Whole Foods, practice yoga and live in San Francisco.
2. Unpretentious pretentiousness - example: bay area people hate pretentiousness, so much that they're pretentious about pretentious people.
3. Intolerant tolerance - example: bay area folks tolerate everyone, except people not like them. If you love diversity and have generally liberal views on gay marriage, abortion, immigration, free speech, Palestine, then you're fine. If not, then stay the hell out.
4. Immodest humility - example: it's generally a no-no in the bay area to flaunt designer brands or be showy about money because it's gauche; however, people flaunt it in more subtle ways, like dropping the fact that they were an early investor in the latest company to IPO.
5. Hostile/opinionated friendliness - example: people in the bay area will chat up perfect strangers and make small talk for no reason and any reason at all, so they seem like the friendliest bunch ever - unless you don't respond with similar friendliness or you let it slip that you are a conservative Christian Republican, in which case you are persona non grata.
I like to say that in SF, you can be anything you want all at once - that while these things may seem contradictory or paradoxical, it means you can basically be and do whatever you want. El Hombre on the other hand points out that these characteristics of contradictory and hypocritical and you can only be and do whatever you want as long as it falls within the accepted norms and confines of the paradoxical place that is the bay area.
We're both right, but whereas I find this to be completely fine and acceptable, El Hombre finds it to be aggravating.
Surprisingly, I think that Hong Kong has actually taught me to be more tolerant than I ever was in liberal California. And that's because in Hong Kong, you are truly free to be whatever you want, as long as you can afford it. And also because Hong Kong is a truly diverse, global city with people from everywhere - so that there is no one "norm." There's what's normal for you, and what's normal for me, and there's nothing to say that there should be any overlap between the two, and it's perfectly fine that your normal and my normal are totally different.
I bring this up because a friend recently confided in me that she fell in love with another woman. All fine and good, except that this friend is married, to a man. I've read about stuff like this but I never really thought I'd come across it personally, at least not among my friends. It was a fascinating (and yet, when I really think about it, not an entirely surprising) revelation. And all I could offer her was this: while her feelings are completely valid, if she loves and is committed to her husband (which she says she is), and she truly loves this other woman (which she says she does), but has no intention to leave her husband (which she says she doesn't), then she needs to work out her feelings but make sure that the people she love are not collaterally damaged - that goes for both her husband and the woman.
My friend's revelation got me to thinking - it is one thing to love and accept others for who they are, to be the friend they need, but: 1) tolerance doesn't mean you should validate everything they want to do if it would end up hurting them or others; and 2) learning of other people's views and boundaries can be helpful in self-realizing what your own beliefs and values are.
1. Yuppie Hippies - example: one out of four people in San Francisco graduated from a top university and work in an entirely yuppie profession such as finance, law, medicine, or a start-up about to IPO, yet think they are hippies because they shop at Whole Foods, practice yoga and live in San Francisco.
2. Unpretentious pretentiousness - example: bay area people hate pretentiousness, so much that they're pretentious about pretentious people.
3. Intolerant tolerance - example: bay area folks tolerate everyone, except people not like them. If you love diversity and have generally liberal views on gay marriage, abortion, immigration, free speech, Palestine, then you're fine. If not, then stay the hell out.
4. Immodest humility - example: it's generally a no-no in the bay area to flaunt designer brands or be showy about money because it's gauche; however, people flaunt it in more subtle ways, like dropping the fact that they were an early investor in the latest company to IPO.
5. Hostile/opinionated friendliness - example: people in the bay area will chat up perfect strangers and make small talk for no reason and any reason at all, so they seem like the friendliest bunch ever - unless you don't respond with similar friendliness or you let it slip that you are a conservative Christian Republican, in which case you are persona non grata.
I like to say that in SF, you can be anything you want all at once - that while these things may seem contradictory or paradoxical, it means you can basically be and do whatever you want. El Hombre on the other hand points out that these characteristics of contradictory and hypocritical and you can only be and do whatever you want as long as it falls within the accepted norms and confines of the paradoxical place that is the bay area.
We're both right, but whereas I find this to be completely fine and acceptable, El Hombre finds it to be aggravating.
Surprisingly, I think that Hong Kong has actually taught me to be more tolerant than I ever was in liberal California. And that's because in Hong Kong, you are truly free to be whatever you want, as long as you can afford it. And also because Hong Kong is a truly diverse, global city with people from everywhere - so that there is no one "norm." There's what's normal for you, and what's normal for me, and there's nothing to say that there should be any overlap between the two, and it's perfectly fine that your normal and my normal are totally different.
I bring this up because a friend recently confided in me that she fell in love with another woman. All fine and good, except that this friend is married, to a man. I've read about stuff like this but I never really thought I'd come across it personally, at least not among my friends. It was a fascinating (and yet, when I really think about it, not an entirely surprising) revelation. And all I could offer her was this: while her feelings are completely valid, if she loves and is committed to her husband (which she says she is), and she truly loves this other woman (which she says she does), but has no intention to leave her husband (which she says she doesn't), then she needs to work out her feelings but make sure that the people she love are not collaterally damaged - that goes for both her husband and the woman.
My friend's revelation got me to thinking - it is one thing to love and accept others for who they are, to be the friend they need, but: 1) tolerance doesn't mean you should validate everything they want to do if it would end up hurting them or others; and 2) learning of other people's views and boundaries can be helpful in self-realizing what your own beliefs and values are.
No comments:
Post a Comment