"I'm currently in the process of finding myself."
I think I first heard that phrase, or some variation of it, on some show like Real World: New Orleans, way back before I had a grasp on what either reality tv or the "real world" was.
When first I heard it, all those years ago, it sounded stupid. Years later, but not too long ago, it still did.
The concept of "finding one's self", at least from a physical standpoint, is exceedingly simple nowadays to those in control of their senses and faculties. Unless you've been kidnapped and transported somewhere, or gotten lost and/or stranded, the dilemma of determining ones location on earth can usually be solved with a quick glance at a GPS or a survey of ones surroundings. Congratulations everyone, you've officially learned how to find yourself!
Even back in the mid-nineties, you knew that people in the process of "finding themselves" weren't waiting for satellites to determine their coordinates. I knew it then, and I know it now, but it still seemed like a conundrum that didn't warrant much speculation.
If you want to know who you are, the easiest way to figure it out is to remember who you've been. Where have you gone, what have you done, what have you seen? What is the résumé of your life? You were the only living person who was around for the entirety of it (save for conjoined twins, and like, babies, I guess), so unless this is a movie ( or an unfortunate circumstance) and you have amnesia, just spend some time scanning your memory banks, come up with a synopsis of your life so far, and bam! You've officially found yourself. Time to pack it up and go home, folks. We're done here.
But it's not that simple, is it? It's true to an extent that you are but an amalgamation of your actions and experiences thus far, and that your thoughts and actions going forward are a result of what has previously shaped and conditioned you to think and do so. Like Bill Parcells said, "You are what your record says you are". It's logical, it's sensible, it's fair, but it's a bit... damning isn't it? Almost oppressing? Borderline suffocating even? Sure, it works well when reflecting on positive times and successes, but what about the mistakes and the failures? They're as much a part of your definition as your triumphs. And by now even this is starting to get cliched, leading up to a big "you just have to accept your past and move on" moment of solemn understanding. And that's fine, have that, and high five yourself for it, because you deserve it, champ. Your past is your past, and it will always in some way define you, whether positively or negatively, but to what extent are we defined by our past as opposed to what we intend to do with our future? We'd probably all agree that the answer lies somewhere in the middle, that our actions and judgments in the present are representative of the balancing act between past experiences and future expectations that go into our decision making; it's the neat rational message that sends everybody home happy. But as nice as it sounds, it usually doesn't work out that way, and things always end up being a lot sloppier in practice.
Consider this: would you let a porn star teach your kids' kindergarten class? Instinctively, most of us would say no. Porn and children are the last two things that anyone should ever consider mixing, in any way, shape, or form. Fine, but what if it was an ex-porn star? And a pretty famous one at that? I think that most people would still be inclined to say no. But why? Porn isn't illegal, and kids certainly (hopefully) don't watch porn, so it would really only be awkward for some parents or older siblings with some less than sparkling internet search histories. Convicted felons aren't allowed to vote or hold certain jobs, and for good reason, but does the same apply to ex-performers who made their money and name off of what people like to watch when no one's around? I won't belabor the discussion, as some great points are made in this piece, and even if you can find reasons for or against it, that's not the discussion I'm here to have.
The topic above, and the ensuing rage-filled debate that it spawned, is an example of what happens when someone's personal past doesn't line up with the public perception of what their future should be, and how the fallout can expose our decision making processes as alot sloppier than we'd think them to be.
Some of these transitions are easier to accept than others. It makes sense that an ex-pro athlete would go into sportscasting, or a singer would (try to) go into acting, or that a successfull businessman would go into politics. We've seen these things before. For that same reason, we wouldn't be completely shocked if a doctor decided to become a lawyer, or if actor wanted to be a govenor, or if, say, LeBron James wanted to take a crack at playing pro football.
But the above example is different, isn't it? We're talking about kids here! They shouldn't have to be stuck in a classroom with someone who gave up a far more lucrative and glamorous (I guess) profession in order to be around them. What if she forgets where she is and walks in naked one day? What if she teaches them the ABC's using dildos instead of pencils? What if she teaches them that (gasp) sex is okay?!
I'd like to think that we're all smart enough to agree that if someone wants to teach kindergartners, they know what is and isn't appropriate for kids to be around.
I'd also like to think that the real debate isn't over the character of the parties involved, but in the clashing of two worlds that we find wholly incompatible, and the resulting mess challenges our assumptions of how much of an indicator a person's past is of their future. We tend to compartmentalize groups of people: athletes are athletes, doctors are doctors, celebrities are celebrities, and assholes are assholes. We make connections from one compartment to another, based on what we've seen before and what we've come to accept as a logical progression. There's nothing wrong with that, it helps us to make sense of all the information in the world. So when someone tries to jump ship from one compartment to another, it makes us uneasy because it confuses things, and life can be confusing enough as is. We spend our whole lives trying to make sense of the world around us, and to adjust to its demands, so when the something relatively simple happens to challenge the assumptions we've labeled as conclusions in our head, we're quick to deny them, and we're quick to be outraged.
Think about how relatively insignificant it is that a former porn star would want to be a teacher, or that someone with visible tattoos would want to be a doctor, or that two people of the same sex would want to get married. We're not asking the question of "is she qualified to become a teacher", "how did he do on his MCATs", or "are they in love"; by and large, all the public outcries that meet these issues are really asking "do these two categories really mix?" or "are these categories supposed to mix?", and our gut reaction is often no, because they don't make sense to us.
Therefore, to an extent, the process of finding yourself has as much to do with how society chooses to view you as with how you choose to view yourself.
As to which process is more complicated or important, I'm not sure. We're taught, in every form of media from fairy tales to mass advertising, that the latter-- how you choose to view yourself-- is of the utmost importance. "You can be whatever you want to be", whether it be a teacher, a lawyer, or even a porn star. But you can't be more than one....well you can, but just not at the same time.... or at least not in a certain order... because that would be wrong... for the kids' sake and all.... but definitely don't forget to teach them that they can be whatever they want to be.... as long as they haven't done porn yet.
The porn example is a little extreme (emphasis on 'a little', there's a lot of amateur porn out there, and I'm sure if one were to search hard enough, they'd be able to identify some unusual suspects in front of the camera), and I've belabored it a bit, but it illustrates the point: despite what they tell you, inner beauty isn't all that matters.
Perceptions matter, appearances matter. With so much information readly available and bombarding us at all times, we make decisions and judgements based on perceptions more than we care to admit. Appearances can skew perceptions in ways that aren't always in line with reality. A millionaire dressed as a bum gets treated like a bum, and a bum dressed like a millionaire gets treated like a millionaire. Appearances matter because perceptions matter. I would expound this stream of thought more thoroughly, but seriously, this post is already taking forever.
The irony of all this is that in writing a blog post about finding oneself, I've completely lost the point I had in mind when I started writing this. If I had to pick a takeaway, I'd say that everything is a two-way street in life, and that whether we like it our not, we have less say in finding ourselves than we think. So there, stop reading.
