A Chance Conversation with the Other Side

I was talking to someone I work with.  Someone on the other side of the political divide.  And she was telling me how much it bothered her when women called themselves by their married names.  Her point was that it was demeaning to women to be just an extension of their husbands.  She said that women shouldn’t take their husband’s name at all, not even as a hyphenate.

I think she expected me to agree with her point of view.  In fact, I think what she was hoping for was an apology by me on behalf of the patriarchy!  So, I thought about telling her what I thought about women taking their husbands’ names.  And then I thought about it.  I’m pretty sure she knew I felt completely differently from her but felt that I should have to defend my point of view.

Instead, what I said was this.  Nowadays the points of view of people are no longer in a narrow range from which people can split the difference and reach a consensus.  The opinions of people have diverged to the point where they could be described as diametrically opposed.  I said that the best that could be done is to give each other enough space to do things in our own ways because otherwise there will be nothing but strife.

After that she let the discussion go.  But I could tell she was very unhappy about my position.

Living in New England, the Left is more or less unopposed.  All opposition to whatever extreme measures are taken by them is crushed in the court of public opinion (the media) or in a judicial court.  And because of this, people on the left can make believe or even actually believe that no other opinions exist except among ostracized, sub-humans that no normal person would have any contact with.

And so, she assumed that her statements would be quickly approved and even amplified by anyone hearing them uttered.  I think she was a little shocked that I didn’t at least pretend that her feelings were obviously correct.  Maybe she expected me to sheepishly explain my opposition by claiming I was an aged and outdated Neandertal who was too stupid to catch up with the world.

Instead, I opened up a window on what goes on outside of her bubble.  Even in New England, she is surrounded by a good proportion of her neighbors and strangers that disagree viscerally with her about an enormous range of subjects.  And in fact, this population is filled with a continual anger over the endless pronouncements, large and small, that the state government inflicts on us.  And because of this none of them feel any smallest sympathy for the kind of unhappiness that this woman felt about women voluntarily taking their husband’s last names in marriage.

And that is why I would so thoroughly enjoy it if Donald Trump were re-elected.  The outrage by the Left would be monumental.  The meltdowns would be histrionic, almost psychotic.  And all that would be very satisfying and cathartic.  But more useful would be the chance to express to any leftist that asked for my sympathy about Trump what I really felt.  And I don’t mean gloating.  I would very calmly explain that Donald Trump was very specifically our solution for all the intentional harm that the Left has inflicted on this country and more particularly on the White population that the Left has been demonizing relentlessly since Obama.

I’m not sure that it will be believed but I think saying it to them is the only chance to break through the bubble in places like New England.  If they come to realize that no amount of proselytizing or cajoling will change the minds of a good chunk of their neighbors’ minds maybe they’ll understand that constraining people to live against their convictions isn’t a winning strategy.

Or maybe nothing we say will ever register with them at all.  Just some thoughts on a chance conversation shouted across the two sides of the chasm.