|
|
Post by bittyboo on Mar 27, 2015 11:51:50 GMT -5
While we have been talking about the concept of "normal" people here lately, this thread isn't really in response to that. Rather, I've been thinking about it because, after learning about my background, someone recently said to me, "But you're so normal."
I may present as "normal," but I carry around my share of baggage. It's just not immediately obvious to the people around me.
It also made me wonder, as similar comments have in the past, what is normal? Certainly, everyone has a different definition of normal.
Do normal people have carefree lives, where everything is sunshine and roses? Where everything magically and effortlessly works out for them? Where they have perfect marriages, have flawless children, beautiful, immaculate homes and advance effortlessly and quickly up the career ladder? Who never suffer financial hardship, serious illness, and are never treated harshly by the world at large? Who weather every storm with a smile of their faces and never lose their tempers? When put that way, it sounds almost laughably unrealistic, but I sometimes think that's an almost universal definition of normal. While that may be a common definition of normal, it is, of course, a very distorted and unattainable normal.
Really, normal people DO suffer every day. Many of them grew up in emotionally or physically abusive homes. They lose their jobs and suffer financial hardship. They have abusive spouses and imperfect children. They, and their loved ones, get cancer and other serious illnesses. Some of them drink too much. They suffer the same indignities as the rest of us. People insult and belittle them, cut them off in traffic, blame them for things that aren't their fault and otherwise occasionally make their lives at least uncomfortable, if not miserable.
Are they normal because the outside world doesn't see or know any of the above? Is it because they find the strength to meet adversity head-on and come out swinging?
What is your personal definition of normal? Is it the idealized version of normal, or the real, but messy version of normal? Or a completely different definition of normal?
Does normal exist at all?
|
|
|
|
Post by cyn on Mar 27, 2015 12:13:44 GMT -5
I have a few different uses for the word. If I said you were "normal" then it would be a compliment and it would basically mean that you have common sense. If I use the word here on this site, I'm describing someone who can keep a house in maintenance. Going overboard into OCD cleanliness doesn't count - I mean just simply staying on top of the chores. To keep on an even keel, pretty much.
|
|
|
|
Post by puzzleqt on Mar 27, 2015 12:29:06 GMT -5
I think normal is the word we use for conditions of basic utility and standards of reasonable/decent/good enough. Then there is the plus side of the scale which is optimal, joyous, fun, plenty, suportive, building. And the negative side of the scale which is non functional, stressful, extremely difficult, hardship, destructive.
Also normal would have occasional forays into both plus and negative sides, but not chronically.
For example getting dressed. Normal is generally finding something to wear that is appropriate for the occasion within a reasonable amount of time and feeling satisfied or meh/ambivilant but fine. you might have to hunt through the socks for a match, but it's easy enough to find a pair, or grab a shirt from the dryer. But it's not a particularly difficult task. Things generally fit, are not too ratty, and look reasonbly well on you.
The plus side, everything is clean, put where it belongs, it fits, feels great, and looks awesome. Dressers and closets are easy to close and open and find things. Accessories have homes and are readily available.
The negative side, getting dressed is a major ordeal, time consuming hunting for things only to not find it, it's dirty, or ruined, settling for something because it is there and will cover your butt even though you hate it. Things are too big, too small, look aweful, have holes, have stains or ripped, or just don't suit you. Constantly hunting under over behind, not enough and too much
|
|
|
|
Post by ohblondie on Mar 27, 2015 13:37:01 GMT -5
Normal is as normal does....
I have no idea what that means but it has been said to me for many years.
Normal is what YOU define normal as.
I don;t necesarily see normal as a straight line with no deviations.......I think Normal to me is what is acceptable or institutionalized as acceptable for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by bittyboo on Mar 27, 2015 14:04:11 GMT -5
Normal is as normal does.... I have no idea what that means but it has been said to me for many years. Normal is what YOU define normal as. I don;t necesarily see normal as a straight line with no deviations.......I think Normal to me is what is acceptable or institutionalized as acceptable for me. I've never really figured out what pretty is as pretty does is supposed to mean, either. It sounds reasonable, and I know what it's supposed to mean, but when you stop and think about it, it's a little ambiguous to say the least. |
|
|
|
Post by hiding on Mar 27, 2015 14:56:04 GMT -5
To me, it's mathematical. Normal is the mean (average). Normal is not the same as healthy or beneficial. If the majority of the US (or British, Aussie, French, Canadian, etc.) population become hoarders, hoarding will be the new normal (average). Would that be a good thing? I don't think so.
|
|
|
|
Post by bittyboo on Mar 27, 2015 15:15:48 GMT -5
To me, it's mathematical. Normal is the mean (average). Normal is not the same as healthy or beneficial. If the majority of the US (or British, Aussie, French, Canadian, etc.) population become hoarders, hoarding will be the new normal (average). Would that be a good thing? I don't think so. That's a very good point. What is considered normal is not always healthy or beneficial. |
|
|
|
Post by Evelyn on Mar 27, 2015 16:36:36 GMT -5
That's a very good point. What is considered normal is not always healthy or beneficial. Right. For instance, 40% (or it is 60%?) of the US population is overweight, which is not healthy or beneficial for anyone (except the food processing and weight loss industries, but I'm not going into that now). And normal is relative: certainly far less than 40% of the global population is overweight, making a normal american an abnormal earthling. Do normal people have carefree lives, where everything is sunshine and roses? Where everything magically and effortlessly works out for them? Where they have perfect marriages, have flawless children, beautiful, immaculate homes and advance effortlessly and quickly up the career ladder? Who never suffer financial hardship, serious illness, and are never treated harshly by the world at large? Who weather every storm with a smile of their faces and never lose their tempers? When put that way, it sounds almost laughably unrealistic, but I sometimes think that's an almost universal definition of normal. While that may be a common definition of normal, it is, of course, a very distorted and unattainable normal. Really, normal people DO suffer every day. Many of them grew up in emotionally or physically abusive homes. They lose their jobs and suffer financial hardship. They have abusive spouses and imperfect children. They, and their loved ones, get cancer and other serious illnesses. Some of them drink too much. They suffer the same indignities as the rest of us. People insult and belittle them, cut them off in traffic, blame them for things that aren't their fault and otherwise occasionally make their lives at least uncomfortable, if not miserable. I think we all live mostly from crisis to crisis. But our crisis differ in scope, from things like "What on earth am I going to make for dinner?" to "How can I get away from my abusive husband before he kills me or one of the kids?" And some of us have deeper financial/emotional/social support wells than others, from "If I can find enough change in the bottom of my purse for a bottle of catsup, that'll make the Tofu Helper nearly palatable," to "Bunny will let me stay at her villa in San Mauritz, and I can easily afford to hire a security company & get round-the-clock bodyguards to keep him away once he figures out where we are." The deeper your well is, the less apparent your crises are to those around you, and the more "normal" you appear. As far as clutter/squalor goes, I think it varies pretty widely between about Level 0.5 and Level 2.5. The average might be around Level 1.5. I think it's more useful to think about what's sustainable: if you kept doing whatever you did today (or this week/month) every day/week/month indefinitely, what would happen? Are you maintaining at whatever your current level is? Would your house gradually creep up towards Level 0 as your small daily improvements added up? Or would things go, er, the other way? My own ultimate goal is to live somewhere around Level 0.5 to Level 1. Level 0 is not something I'd really even want to maintain, and much more than Level 1 is more clutter than I'm comfortable with. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Mar 27, 2015 17:09:02 GMT -5
I think hiding nailed it. And Evelyn clarified very nicely. "Normal" is pretty much a useless descriptor in real life. And "normal" in the technical (mathematical average) sense isn't necessarily a good thing. Quite the opposite, actually. I'm in the residential construction/remodeling industry. Most of my clients are high income and live in fancy show-home type McMansions. Often with the support of paid help and "OMG I cannot live with this color for another second" there is a wide strata of people who regard having an overdecorated, sterile home as the only possible standard. I am in these "perfect" homes many days of my life. They are God-awful, unimaginitive and boring. They are not normal. They are sterile and uncomfortable. A recent client just dumped the family dog at the county shelter because he was leaving toenail marks on the floor. She might be keeping her house at a "level 0" but she is not a nice person and her house is a sterile showplace of Chinese-made gew-gaws from Kohls and the ever-necessary granite counters and spooned fake cherry wood floors and chalk-paint faux country cabinets. Anyhow, I digress.  I think "normal" is a subjective term and I don't know what it means, really. I bet if you were to survey 1,000 people,including sociologists, you would not be able to nail down a definition of "normal." |
|
|
|
Post by Rory on Mar 27, 2015 18:40:17 GMT -5
"All the world is queer save thee and me, and even thou art a little queer." This was before the modern usage of the word "queer".
So normal is different from us.
|
|
|
|
Post by razy on Mar 27, 2015 19:26:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ohblondie on Mar 27, 2015 20:02:19 GMT -5
Honestly? I think Razy had the best response. Clear and to the point! !!
|
|
|
|
Post by bittyboo on Mar 27, 2015 21:54:24 GMT -5
WAIT!!! My washing machine doesn't have a "Normal" cycle! My washing machine is not normal! Seriously, I LOVE THIS! Also, my washing machine really doesn't have a "Normal" cycle. It has about 15 other cycles, of which I use two, but no "Normal" cycle. I also see I managed to like one of my own posts. Great. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Mar 27, 2015 22:18:30 GMT -5
OMG razy, that is hysterical!
|
|
|
|
Post by phoenixcat on Mar 29, 2015 9:53:20 GMT -5
Thank you Razy - that is where the expression my dad used to say came from - "everyone's crazy but you and me and I'm not so sure about you" All sarcasm intended  |
|
