Oscar the Gauche

Matthew says I'm not a very socially intuitive person. Maybe my intelligence in other areas leeches all my social intelligence. Or maybe I'm just ornery.

Generally, I mind my p's and q's. The community here is fairly progressive. I've learned not to assume things about relationships. For example, don't assume that, just because a man and a woman have lived together for 20 years and have children, they're MARRIED. Don't assume that two guys dancing together would rather be dancing with girls (I think they were joking about that, but I'm not positive). The best way to not disturb the animals is to maintain a pleasant, non-insinuating smile at all times.

But sometimes I can't help but put my foot in it.

The other day at dinner, I realized that I can be shockingly progressive, too. I was talking to a group from S.C. about men holding doors. A guy from Michigan, whose mother happens to be a women's studies professor, said very diplomatically,

"I think it's just polite for people in general to hold doors for each other, regardless of sex."

Everyone nodded and smiled, and one of the southerners tried to bring consensus by summarizing, "So holding doors isn't offensive?"

I should have left it at that, but my dark side kicked in and said,

"Actually, I DO get offended if a man GOES OUT OF HIS WAY to hold a door for me. I'm not some delicate little southern belle, and I'm probably more capable of opening the damn door than most men."

Conversation stopped. I saw a little caption pop above my head that said "second-wave feminist."

Harry Potter-mania has also been tempting my dark side. It is deeply disturbing to me that 3 out of 20 headlines on the BBC and the NY Times are about a rather unremarkable children's fantasy series. Have we indeed reached the end of history? Norman Mailer never created this much hullabaloo. I went to see the most recent Potter movie, and frankly it was dumb. People popped in and out of the plot to save Potter, and there was much waving of wands. I don't object to teenagers reading the books, but, come on people, let's at least move on to Anne Rice if we're over 20. I actually thought the first few books were fun, but if I wanted a dark, depressing, doomed bildungsroman, I'd read something with a little more stylistic "oomph" -- by Dickens -- or maybe even Hardy or Dostoevsky.

Anyway, Potter is quite popular here (scientists -- not necessarily literary afficianados), so there was probably no excuse for my snide comment at breakfast:

"Yes, the Potter books came out a bit after my time. I had already moved on to more complex literature . . ."

The prudent part of my brain preserved me from saying ". . . by the time I was ten."