I don't know

So we've been having problems lately. I think that's part of the reason I started this blog, just so even though I'm shouting out into nothing, at least I'm shouting, and maybe someone will hear. Not that it will be anyone that needs to hear it. But at least there's someone out there somewhere that knows something... or something. I don't know.

Maybe I'm gullible. Maybe I'm paranoid. I don't know which. It's really hard, when you've built your life around someone, to be able to accept that maybe you didn't have the best judgment. I'm sorry, I don't care how independent you are, if you marry someone, you've built part of your life around them. That's the whole point. And when you have that kind of foundation, if it suddenly gets unstable, it can rock your world.

Symptoms:
1) (may be nothing) A few months before we got married, he had a total breakdown for two straight days; I have never seen this man cry before, but he did. And it didn't stop. There was nothing I could do. He wasn't exactly sobbing, but he was despondent and I couldn't rouse him, no matter what I did - I tried acting normal, I tried comforting him, I tried making fun of him, joking, trying to get him angry, etc. Nothing helped. He kept saying how upset he'd be with himself and how upset everyone else would be if he "messed this up." Does that mean he already messed up and just didn't want to tell me?
2) Coming home late from work without calling... happened for like a week. Normally gets home at 6:45, was coming home at 7:45 or even after 8:00.
3) Texting. He always told me who he was texting, supposedly. But once I walked out into the living room while he was texting; he didn't spot me, but he heard me and quickly hid the phone in his lap. He didn't see me - it was dark - and waited a little while before retrieving his phone and continuing to text. This was at like 12:02 (I looked at the clock to time how long I should wait before revealing I was there). He was texting for like a full minute - pushing buttons. Then later I asked him about it - the next day. He showed me some texts that were from 11:23. And he said that he hid his phone because I'd startled him. So why should startling him cause him to hide his phone?
4) Hiding his cell phone. He used to just leave it out. I've gone around and around in my head about this one. He always used to forget it. So I've rationalized for him - maybe he wants to keep it close so he stops forgetting it. But he isn't doing the same things with his keys and wallet - two items that he also frequently loses. So there goes that theory.
5) Complete and utter disinterest in sex. And, when we do start anything, unresponsiveness. Erectile dysfunction? I have no idea. There's always some excuse, though. Too much to eat. Too hot. Too cold. Stressed.

So yeah... happened again last night. And he snapped at me while I was trying to comfort him. I don't even remember what about, but I've told him before I don't like it when he snaps at me.

I don't know what to do. We aren't dating anymore; we are married. With someone I'm dating, my game would be to just ignore the hell out of them. "I don't need you" kind of attitude - make them realize that yeah, maybe they don't want me, but I don't need them, so am I really going to notice if they leave me? Whatever. And that works when you're dating - it keeps them hanging around. But we are married now. I want to reach out. but he is withdrawing from me and I don't understand why or how to fix it. And if I am being cheated on, I don't want to stick around for that bullshit.

I feel like every normal little thing is so traumatic for him. Yes - we are married now. OK. I don't know anyone else that it's had this effect on. He keeps expressing how uncomfortable it is for him to wear his ring - physically uncomfortable. He doesn't understand that you just get used to it. And he was so exceedingly traumatized by the whole wedding. Seriously - just a giant ball of stress, he started taking medication. It's a wedding. It's a ring. Dear God. What is going to happen when we have kids? I don't even know.

I'm so angry and insecure and the problem is, the person I normally run to is the person I can't turn to. I don't know what to do. I don't want to be a grown-up anymore. I always thought having a spouse would be a good thing. I always thought it would be someone you could be open with and share life with and enjoy time with. Instead I feel like I am a burden, a nuisance.

I just am scared. I don't want to end this. I really don't. But maybe that is my problem? I don't know. I wanted this so much. I was so happy. And now it's just like it's the end before it even started.

Dear Semi-Boss,

What exactly do you do all day? We've been working on this case since October. You know it inside and out, better than I do. While I don't mind doing leg work, I'm getting a touch confused. You do realize that you work 40 hours per week, while I, a mere student, work 12 to 20? And you do realize that I have school work outside of that?

See, I just feel a little confused, because it seems like you are expecting me to sit there and do all the work while you sit in your office with your thumb up your ass. Also you are shoving all of your articles and textbook updates off on me; when exactly do you expect me to get those done in addition to all of my other obligations? I have two articles to write for myself. And I actually get to put my name on them. Meanwhile, you are asking me to write this shit for you so you can put your name on it and claim my work? Fuck you.

You do realize that I took this job because you guys were flexible about my school schedule, right? And also that I have done a hell of a good job and that losing me would be a really bad idea for you, right? And what the hell - I thought you and I had a good rapport. But you had to send that email out to everyone at work telling them to leave me alone so I could work on stuff for you. Because that didn't seem like I was incompetent and unable to keep up with my work or anything. Go to hell.

See, I just find it interesting, because when I went in and gave the partner the Motion for Summary Judgment, he looked really confused.

"Did you write this, or did [confidential]?"
"I did, why?"
"He told me that he was doing it and that's why he couldn't work on anything else all day."
"Oh."
"So what's he been doing?"
"I don't know, sitting there with his thumb up his ass?"

Yes I did say that and no I don't regret it. I just don't get it - what exactly ARE you doing all day? Because it doesn't seem to be work. I did the stuff for that case. I also had to do all the updates that the other attorneys were asking us for. I just don't get it. When did it go from us working on this together to me doing work while you stand there like a giant stress-ball?

ARGH. It sucks to be a peon.

Gunner v. Troublemaker

In law school, there are two types of people to beware of. One of them is the gunner. The gunner is one who, no matter what the class discussion is about – some broad all-encompassing question of Constitutional Law or some minor and obscure point of tax law – has to contribute his or her two cents. And about two cents is about as much as that person’s point is worth. You know the signs of a gunner if an individual starts expressing his opinion – note, opinion, not answering a question in furtherance of discussion - one or more times per class period, every class period; is usually wrong; and causes a unanimous class-wide eye-roll every time he speaks up. They are the over-eager, leaky puppy of law school.

The other type of person to look out for is the troublemaker. The troublemaker is the one who, for no particular reason, thinks their smart-ass, off-the-cuff, typically rude comments are somehow regularly welcome in the classroom. This individual is usually trying to get a rise out of people. If a professor asks, “Now, why do you think the court decided to institute this doctrine in this case?”, the troublemaker will usually respond with a comment such as, “Textbook material?”

These comments are occasionally welcome as a way of breaking up an otherwise monotonous subject matter. No doubt, some of us wish we had said something of the sort in class at some point or another. However, the troublemaker does not really understand the meaning of the word “moderation” when it comes to these remarks. No, he thinks that his disruptive, irrelevant dialogue is meant to be part of the overriding discussion on a regular basis. Typically he is quite self-aware and is usually trying to get a rise out of people. While the motivations behind being a gunner are quite obvious – currying favor with the professor and general self-glorification – the troublemaker’s motive is a bit more elusive. No one really knows why these people have an extra $200,000 lying around just to go to law school and make snarky remarks. Perhaps they are, indeed, intelligent and are so bored by the rest of us mediocre students that they must entertain themselves in their own fashion. Really, we’ll never know.

What becomes extremely amusing is when you get an interesting case of Gunner v. Troublemaker during class. I had the privilege of witnessing such an exchange during my Education & Policy class this week, and I have to say it was a rare treat. I did not much care for Troublemaker before today. He had been in my Family Law class in a previous semester and, while I don’t think he fits into the normal category of Troublemaker in that he is actually kind of earnest so that it softens his arrogance to a degree, he tended to irritate me a bit. Today, however, I have decided that I like this individual quite a bit, at least in this context.

Our discussion today centered on compulsory education. Troublemaker was doing a presentation for extra credit on the topic, and posed the controversial idea that compulsory attendance should be abolished and replaced with optional free public education, with funding allocated according to attendance. Pause here to say that Troublemaker did not actually believe the views he was espousing on this subject, but still presented it in a very logical, well-defended manner. He actually does have a bit of a knack for playing devil’s advocate. He therefore laid out a system where mandatory attendance would be abolished for minors and replaced with a system where parents would be responsible for directing the child’s educational path. That might be traditional public school, private school, home schooling, or apprenticeships and vocational training.

This whole thing drove Gunner absolutely nuts. She, a former teacher (note: Troublemaker was also a former teacher), could not believe someone was having the audacity to suggest that her beloved mandatory attendance system could, in any way, be flawed. Pause here to note that Gunner belongs to an elite group of people in the class that have formerly been employed in education, and if you have not previously been a teacher or school administrator, you have absolutely no basis for your opinion and should be disqualified from class discussions out of hand. Because, clearly, alienating outsiders to the education system that could bring in new, innovative, and fresh ideas is the answer to the education crisis in America today. Moving on.

Many people were exceedingly amused by this exchange, myself among them. Gunner asked for data. Troublemaker pointed out that this system was not really in place anywhere like the U.S., so data was unavailable, but posed some smaller examples – such as popular elective courses attracting students who didn’t have to take them but instead wanted to – that were relevant. Gunner was not satisfied with this – what about the social structures that school serves as a doorway for? Troublemaker indicated that social services do exist, and that these social services might actually be a better manner of reaching out to needy families than trying to institute such programs through public schools. Etc. Etc.

The discussion continued in much the same way for about 30 to 40 minutes. Occasionally a couple other people got to talk besides Gunner, but she had an obnoxious tendency to interrupt, interject, and generally tried to dominate the entire presentation. She took everything very personally. No answer was good enough for her. I really wanted to look at her and say “Calm down. This is a class discussion; no one is actually talking about implementing this here.” Many people do not seem to realize that good solutions can often be found by posing a completely off-the wall, crazy idea just to get a discussion going – such ideas can often spawn less-crazy ideas that might actually work. To her, this was an all-out attack on her personal beliefs rather than an interesting class discussion that really got some people’s heads working.

This Gunner also absolutely had to get the last word. No two ways about it. When it seemed like everything was winding down so the professor could resume regular class, she had to throw her hands up in the air (literally – it was like jazz hands) and spout off some inane bullshit just to demonstrate that she was, in fact, smarter than Troublemaker and that his system could never, in a million years, work. He didn’t seem to care much, smiled politely, and stepped down. Her eye-rolling and impatient sighs after class as she talked to her Elite Group of Former Educators were just as amusing to watch as her progressive hysteria during class. Well played, Troublemaker. Well played.

Antagonism

Have you ever woken up really desperately wanting to pick a fight with someone? Not necessarily anyone, though at this point I might take it. I feel like I have a great deal of pent up aggression lately. Part of this stems from my overriding frustration at state employees that is still burning strong. Yes, I'm still on that. This is why I think I'm certifiable - I get completely fixated. It takes a while to drop it. Unless the courthouse burns down sometime between now and this weekend. I probably just got myself on some government hit list when I wrote that. No, I'm not burning down the courthouse. I'm just saying. If I saw it happening, it might make me feel better. A little.

Anyways, today I woke up wanting to yell at people. I'm going through a bit of a phase where I feel like I'm right a lot. This doesn't happen often. Most of the time I concede; I'm actually a really big pushover. But at the moment, I am wondering why the world is not conforming to my personal viewpoint. It's really quite egotistical; part of me is enjoying it immensely.

Take people who go around being confrontational, for example. I have a particular friend - that I love dearly and I wish every happiness for - who, if someone looks at her, has about 15 things to say about that person right then and there, starting with belittling their intelligence level and moving on to their choice in hairstyle and footwear without missing a beat. I'm not saying a particular someone. Just anyone. If you happen to be walking down the same street as this individual, pray that you do not accidentally let your gaze fall upon her form. If you're like me, you'd just walk right on by when she started in on you, not giving her the satisfaction of a confrontation. One of these days, I'd like to witness it if someone actually tried talking back to her. I'm fairly certain they'd lose an eye.

I've questioned this individual on multiple occasions about the personal philosophy that must accompany this tendency. I have mused aloud that I'm quite relieved she and I met under friendly circumstances, as I'm pretty sure that otherwise I would have allowed a wayward glance to cross her way and promptly had my face boiled off by her wrath. Her response is: "It's different."

I have not really probed the depths of this idea of "different." I'm not quite sure I understand how someone can encounter so many "different" glances in such a short span of time as she tends to. I have probably run into only three or four "different" glances in my entire life. She is quite gorgeous; perhaps that's it? I'm not sure - I don't belong to that particular category of human being, so maybe I'm missing something. (That is not me fishing for compliments; I can be pretty when I want to be, I just tend to be kind of lazy with my clothing/makeup choices.)

My question, though, ultimately, is: Does this individual really believe that, by attempting to pick fights with every person whose eyes have the unfortunate tendency to slip her way - or, really, that does something she finds particularly offensive (but is really quite harmless), does she believe that the world is going to change through her efforts? People are still going to be rude and do minor petty things like stand in the middle of a hallway where people are trying to walk. And unfortunately it's just not a physical possibility to let everyone on the planet know that you do not want to be looked at. I therefore question all the wasted effort and all the time spent getting worked up over such silly things.

And really I keep looking back to the broader societal issue of: why the hell can't we all just get along? What's the point of being confrontational? I tend to go by the "benefit of the doubt" philosophy. If someone looks at me or is in my way or what have you, I tend to assume they are not being malicious. Perhaps they aren't self-aware. Perhaps they've had a bad day. But really, I don't understand harsh reactions to people. Kind of like I don't understand why state employees are rude. I don't really know why anyone is rude. We're all in this together. We are all muddling through these societal constructs we've created for ourselves, dealing with enough meaningless bullshit day-to-day, that I don't see why we have to make it that much more difficult or unpleasant for each other.

Call me a hippie. I'm really not. Perhaps after reading a few too many cases about promissory notes and negotiable instruments, I'm starting to wax philosophical as a means of escaping. I wonder, what's the point of it all? I listen to politicians on the news. I've always considered myself quite conservative, but these days they all come across as blah-blah-blah. I really don't care what they have to say, either side. It's hard to get riled up when it's all the same shit, just re-packaged and re-canned for a different day.

I'm probably just going through the same existential crisis as the next graduate student. No problem. Nothing a bottle of Cherry Pepsi can't fix. Seriously, have you tried this stuff? It's awesome.

First Post

Hi, I'm Kelly, and I'm a law student.

Wow, it's good to get that off my chest.

I'm creating this blog because, honestly, I am fairly certain this entire experience for the last year and a half has made me certifiably insane.

I'm not particularly in the mood to recap "up to this point" at the moment; maybe soon, but not right now. Generally I'll probably use this space to rant out into the ether. Rage at my fate. Etc.

The things most likely to appear in my blog will consist of my experiences as a law student, a law clerk for a small divorce firm I'm currently working for, a married woman, and a generally crazy person.

Currently, what's on my mind is... state employees.

I. Hate. State. Employees.

And I have to deal with them every single time I'm at work.

Don't get me wrong - there are good ones. Just like any profession, there are state employees I look forward to seeing, who are friendly and good at their jobs. But for some reason, the state sector seems to attract an inordinate number of a particular breed of individual that, for some reason, thinks s/he is entitled to work in a semi-customer service position and yet not practice any form of common courtesy. In fact, many of them are downright rude - for no reason. And somehow they can't be fired. Please explain to me how this makes sense.

Example 1:

I occasionally cover hearings for work where we just have to go in and enter agreed orders to get a continuance. Not a big deal - you explain to the judge what is going on in the case and then get a date, usually 30 to 45 days out, to meet up again, pretty much until the case settles or goes to trial. This happens many times throughout the life of your average dissolution case.

One judge's assistant in particular, for some reason unbeknownst to me, has it out for me. I don't know why. I have been in this judge's courtroom approximately 3 times in 7 months - there is no reason this assistant should know me from Eve. Despite my problems with state employees, I am undeservingly polite to each and every one of them - I say please and thank you and wish them a nice day at the close of every interaction. It's won me some favor with a few of them, but somehow this individual seems to find me grossly inconvenient and/or offensive despite my exceedingly limited contact with him.

After a hearing with the judge, I must approach this assistant in order to schedule the next hearing date for my case. Typically the interaction goes something like this:

(I approach the assistant, who is jotting things down on pieces of paper at his desk; I wait to be acknowledged - I consider this the polite thing to do, rather than interrupt him in the middle of whatever he is doing)

(He continues writing things down on paper; he shuffles the paper around; pretty soon it is apparent that he's not really doing anything, he's just making me wait. He's aware of my presence but, for some reason, has decided to ignore me.)

(I wait still to be acknowledged, feeling that I am just being polite; other clerks and attorneys are starting to line up behind me to get dates. Everyone is getting impatient.)

(Finally I give up waiting.)

"Excuse me, could I please get a date the week of XYZ for case number #?"

(He responds with stony silence, as if I have just said something horribly offensive. I wait, knowing that he, like other judge's assistants, is supposed to check the availability of that week before giving me an exact date.)

(I wait some more. People are still impatient behind me.)

"What date you want?" he finally asks, not even bothering to look at me.

I tell him.

"Yeah sure fine."

I jot it down on my order, give it to him for approval, it goes to the judge's clerk, and then I'm out.

I turn to observe on my way out. No one else seems to be having this problem. He is giving out dates in a perfectly polite manner to each person that approaches.

This causes me no end of confusion. As I said, I am a non-entity to this individual - he has never really met me before, I am just one of a hundred anonymous individuals he will meet that morning. Yes, there are regulars that he does know. But there are people like me, all the time, that are there only sparingly, forgettably.

Yet it has been the same every single time when I do this. I have gone to drop off courtesy copies for the judge and been standing there for literally a minute and a half waiting for this person to acknowledge me so I could ask who to give them to so they don't get lost in the shuffle.

Am I off-base here? Isn't it normal for someone to wait politely until they are acknowledged before speaking? Isn't it normal to acknowledge someone?