Monday, 24 June 2013

A man named Bill

The book editor turned out to be nothing like what I expected. Not that I’d ever really given it much thought. But when he turned out to be: 1) a ‘he’, 2) White, 3) American, and 4) Roman Catholic, I suddenly realized that this wasn’t what I had in mind (subconsciously) at all.  

But what do I know? I’m a novice who hadn’t planned to start a blog in the first place, much less a book, and who really didn’t know what exactly the role of a book editor was, anyway. All this is one big adventure to me.

The publisher sent me the editor’s profile to review. His name really is Bill. His credentials were terribly impressive – so much so that I sent a quick thank you email to the publisher for choosing him with such care. I was still really apprehensive, though, about some of the remarks made by authors Bill had worked with in the past. I noted one in particular who talked about his book having to be re-written ‘with 75% new content, just as [Bill] had predicted.’ This author sounded really happy. I balked at the thought of having to re-write stuff. Where on earth would I find the time? I read some more of Bill’s profile and found that this author’s book ended up doing really well. No wonder he sounded so happy.

I sent the profile to my sister along with the first couple of emails from Bill so we could compare notes. I thought he was absolutely hilarious. He ends almost every email with a joke that cracks me up.

‘Doesn’t he sound like fun?’ I asked my sister.

‘He sounds absolutely delightful!’ she replied.

Perhaps it was naïve of us, but my sister and I still couldn’t get over the fact that he was actually a ‘he.’  It was also interesting to us that he wasn’t African and wasn’t of the same Christian ‘flavor’ as I am. But the not-being-a-woman part was something that really gave us pause. No disrespect at all to the male readers of this blog (nor to men in general), but I did wonder how possible it would be for him to really ‘get it’ – to deeply understand where I, as a woman, was coming from with the very personal thoughts and perspectives that make up the blog. I mentioned this to him when I received his first set of comments. I mentioned it out of relief, really, as I discovered that I need not have bothered. I also mentioned how much I hate reviews (well, I hate having my own work reviewed, anyway, even though I love the benefits in the end). I spend a considerable amount of time at work getting peer-reviewed and providing peer reviews, and if this is what a book editor did, then I was going to dread this process.

Fortunately (very, very fortunately), it turned out that I had nothing to worry about. I found that I thoroughly enjoyed responding to Bill’s comments, and it has been a pleasure stealing time on my weekends to do so.

When I pitched the idea of blogging about the process of turning the rmj blog into a book, he enthusiastically replied: ‘Feel free about mentioning that your editor is a guy from Texas!’


So I’ve conveyed his message (J). More to come. 

Sunday, 16 June 2013

On my honor

I am not my divorce.

And yet … I am.

The divorce is an important part of my life, without a doubt. It’s just that it’s not the whole thing.

I am so many other things apart from divorced that I can hardly keep up with me.

Granted, I often see life through the lens of divorce – just like I once used to see life through the lens of what-seemed-to-be-a-really-promising, and then what-turned-out-to-be-a-failing, marriage. I suppose this is only natural. But after my initial ‘divorce stare’ at an issue, I make a concerted effort to subject the same issue to other perspectives, too. There is no point in letting marital status kick one out of balance.

I want to try and dwell on the positive ways in which divorce has shaped me, is shaping me.

I am no longer using my relationship with a marriage partner as an excuse not to dare to to have a life of my own.

I am no longer afraid of the idea of being alone,like I was prior to marriage.

There is a crack in everything, as this blog post reminds us: http://www.marydemuth.com/there-is-a-crack-in-everything-tedd-cadd/. That’s how the light gets in.

The ‘crack’ in my life that my divorce represents has let in light, no doubt. That light gives me the energy to strive and hope for good things now and in the future. And because I believe life is essentially good, I pledge the following:

I pledge not to lose my smile. To smile with my eyes and not just with my lips. To continue to smile often.

I pledge not to make my life all about me; to continue to take an interest in others. To be compassionate toward others.

I pledge to deliberately reach out to others – to not get so absorbed with my own set of circumstances that I forget just how much I still have to give to others.

I pledge to use my voice – but to try and remember to do so in a way that is gracious and edifying for others, rather than just plain hurtful.

I pledge to use my gifts, talents, abilities, and experiences to bless others. I already know that I won’t always feel like it. I also know that whether I feel like it or not at the time, in the end, it’s always worth it, and I end up feeling more blessed than those I was meant to bless.

I pledge to sincerely root for the troubled marriages that come my way to make it, the way others once rooted for mine. With a very different style, I suppose, but I’ll root for them nonetheless.

I pledge to give people a fair chance: to not judge anyone by my past experiences, but to give people time to show me who they are – and then (only then) make a decision as to where they belong in my life.

I pledge to stay grateful; to see my glass as half-full rather than half-empty.

I pledge to step out more, to try new things (not too many new things, but at least some!), to not stop trying at life in general.  

I pledge to never drift too far away from joy. To find my way back when I do drift.

I make this pledge to myself.



Saturday, 15 June 2013

Three Questions (or ‘Headstrong’ Part III)

I thought it best to hold off on answering the final question right away.

I can’t say I was completely blindsided by it, but I was still unprepared. They wanted to know if I would consider delivering some of the Sunday sermons at church.

I blinked with surprise.

I could see how all three questions were closely linked, we did not discuss this fact. If I wasn’t a known tither and if my attendance of regional church meetings was poor, then these were strikes against me. I would be expected to get all my ducks in a row, so to speak, if I were to accept this role. I was humbled that they saw me in this sort of light despite my obvious inability to play completely by the rules. I was also a bit confused, though. Why would they want to risk this – i.e., want to risk placing someone like me in that sort of a position? And by ‘someone like me,’ I’m not referring to my marital status. I’m referring to my annoying, non-conformist nature tendencies. I saw what they were proposing as a recipe for disaster, and wondered how well they had thought this through. As I’ve asserted elsewhere, THERE’S SOMETHING ABSOLUTELY WRONG WITH MY CHURCH!


I held off of on answering the question out of respect. I had an immediate response formed in my head, but felt that two ‘negative’ responses were enough for one day, so I asked for a bit of time to get back to them. My response was relayed a week later via email. I thanked them for the faith they had in me but politely declined. My reasons were simple:

  1. Playing the proposed role really isn’t an interest or desire of mine.
ü  I like to keep a low profile and want to keep things that way.
ü  I lead a really busy life and taking on more responsibility at this time wouldn’t be wise. My children don’t need me to be even more distracted than I am right now.
ü  I’m mindful of my church context and have observed that divorce is a really sensitive topic for the overall institution. The result is that there is a lot of fuzziness in members’ minds about the church’s actual position on it. I would rather not take on such a public role without absolute clarity on the issue among the members. Even then, I’d still turn such an offer down.

  They left the offer on the table in case I change my mind. I know I won’t.




Tuesday, 11 June 2013

Three Questions (or ‘Headstrong’ Part II)

The second question had to do with why I don’t attend regional church programs.

Regional programs are those meetings/events that bring all members of one overall church from different branches together as one. I’m sure these programs serve many different purposes. The ones I can think of off the top of my head are: They provide a forum for getting to know everyone else in your city (and even beyond) that attends the same overall church as you, but not necessarily your branch. They foster a greater feeling of oneness in churches with a vision of having lots of conveniently-located branches – particularly since such churches risk getting ‘out of hand’ due to the sheer numbers of their membership. And so, these meetings actually also help the overall leadership guage the collective pulse of their extensive membership and keep all church branches in a certain region abreast of important developments at the same time. They represent one way of doing the extremely difficult job of overseeing several churches at once.

I’m a ‘small’ church kind of person. I’ve always naturally gravitated toward smaller congregations. I suppose that’s the case for a lot of introverts. I like the easy-going, informal, family feel of small groups. That was part of my attraction to my current church. To be fair, when I went through the formal procedures of becoming an actual member of the church, I had no inkling what role ‘The Region’ was expected to play in my life. I remained blissfully oblivious for several years, actually. I would hear the announcements about regional programs and think to myself, ‘How nice that this is available to whoever wants to attend,’ without it occurring to me that I should participate. Little did I realize that as one who served in some department of the church, attending these meetings was mandatory, and I was supposed to know this. Whoever took me through the church membership procedures must have left that part out.

The idea of attending regional programs makes me feel like I belong to two totally different churches, even though I realize this isn’t the intention. It’s just a bit ‘much’ for me, and actually quite disorienting. We ‘Phlegmatics’ are known for our low energy levels. There’s just not enough to go round and so it has to be apportioned carefully. As I can barely keep up with all the programs in my own church branch, adding on another layer of church activity is just unfathomable. There was a time when I could have done it – when I was younger and without responsibilities. In those days, I used to live for church programs and I enjoyed every bit of doing so.

That was then, though. Today, with parenthood and a high-stress job, I secretly pat myself on the back for even being able to sustain my current level of church involvement. I’ve told my pastor honestly that I don’t believe I need to be in every single church meeting. But I will do what I can to be there for as much as I feel I can handle at this point in my life.

As I relayed this information to my visitors, there was some understanding of where I was coming from. I wasn’t the only one that was surprised by how large ‘The Region’ would loom after joining what I thought was my little church branch. The issue of being ‘under authority’ re-emerged. I thought about this a bit. I could see how I might be perceived as ‘unserious,’ as ‘disobedient,’ as ‘disrespectful,’ or as having a chip on my shoulder if I’m absent from these meetings when I’m expected to be present. But I don’t think emotions such as guilt or the need to appear a certain way in others’ eyes (or even respect for others) should be my motivation for attending meetings that are meant to draw me closer to God. The last thing I want to do is spread myself too thin, making technical appearances (which is what many of them would be for me), and attending anything and everything when I actually don’t want to – and then start grumbling behind everyone’s back about it.


Call me stubborn, call me crazy, call me not-Christian-enough. All I’m trying to be, though, is balanced. Balanced for me, that is, as I am the one that has to cope with all the moving pieces of my life. I can’t stand biting off more than I can chew. I don’t do so well when that happens. 

Saturday, 8 June 2013

Three Questions (or ‘Headstrong’ Part I)

They wanted to know why they have never seen me come out to give my tithe.

They asked in the nicest, most polite way possible. I understood that their intention was not to be offensive, and I took no offense. I also sensed that this question was a sort of build-up to another, overarching question – that this visit was no ordinary visit.

I have to explain what they meant by ‘come out.’

For years in my church, tithe-giving (that is, giving a tenth of one’s income towards the work of God) was a private affair. In the recent past, however, this changed unceremoniously. As I remember it, one Sunday, a visiting pastor asked all those that had their tithes to come out to the altar for a special prayer. And that was it. From then on, it became a weekly occurrence – an announcement each Sunday for all those with their tithes prepared to come out for prayer prior to the act of giving.

I thought this was odd as I had never witnessed this practice before in my years of church attendance in various countries, but I also reasoned that it wasn’t obligatory to come to the altar if one didn’t feel right about it. (This wasn’t a cult, after all.) I kept my thoughts on the matter to myself, though, and have continued to give my tithe privately. No one had ever called me out on it, and I never expected anyone to as no rationale was ever given for this abruptly-introduced, new practice. In the meantime, I have observed as the number of tithe-givers at the altar increased from month to month.

I appreciated the fact that I was now asked this question point-blank by a couple that I deeply respect. My response to them was that the fact that one doesn’t give their tithe publicly doesn’t necessarily mean that one isn’t a tithe-giver. My position is that the important thing is to give your tithe, and that the process of doing so may be different for different members. If the church has concerns that its members are not doing so, then it needs to devote time to teaching about the rationale and power behind giving.

I’m very aware of the debates around tithing and I’ve met one or two members of my own church who are of the opinion that tithing isn’t meant to be a modern practice. Even then, few people I’ve met that have issues with tithing believe that Christians should simply not be givers. I think most people of faith are more concerned about being manipulated (or about watching others experience this) than about giving itself.

With my divorce, I’ve had to get smarter about my finances, and so I have a number of finance-related books by my bed. I must have at least 4 of Suze Orman’s books. I read Jean Chatzky, too, and some others. One of the things that I know Suze Orman teaches for sure is the importance of giving some of what you have away (I think Jean Chatzky does, too, but don’t quote me on that!). Giving really does seem to be an important principle that the wealthy tend to adhere to, whether they are people of faith or not – and, of course, there are so many ways to give that are beyond finances alone.

They assured me that the church didn’t raise any concerns about my giving, and that these were just their personal questions to me.  I explained that I thought it was a bit manipulative to have all tithe-givers make themselves known publicly. It also had the potential to encourage certain wrong motivations for giving. There was some agreement about this, but I was asked to consider those who might not be giving their tithes because they had the impression that I (as a church worker/leader) wasn’t giving mine, either.

I pointed out that it all goes back to proper teaching, if this was indeed a concern. Besides, why would anybody base their tithing decisions on my behavior alone, and not on that of the majority of the church members who did give their tithes publicly?

There was a reminder that being ‘under authority’ in a church, sometimes you do things out of respect for the authority that you operate under. I explained that I believe in reasoning with the authorities about things I may not agree with. Plus, even the authorities have blind spots, and if no one points them out, then we’re all in big trouble.

The tithing question was one of three that I was asked that day. The discussion took me back to how I began tithing in the first place.

I started tithing at age 16 or 17, which is the first time I actually heard the word ‘tithe.’ In those days, Bishop Benson Idahosa’s ministry brought Frederick K. C. Price’s ‘Ever-Increasing Faith’ program on the air in our little town, and Frederick Price was doing a series on tithing. I got the part about the tithe being ‘one-tenth’ of your income, but I didn’t fully grasp the process through which tithes should be paid. I calculated my tithe for the first time ever and it was exactly five naira. I mailed it to the address on the screen (Idahosa’s ministry), with a note saying I wanted to buy some tapes with it (I don’t remember if they were music tapes or teaching tapes). My understanding was that I could use my tithe to buy ‘Christian’ stuff. (I’m not sure how I came up with this idea.)

Some weeks later, I got a package from Idahosa’s ministry. I was so excited! It was pretty large. I thought it would contain the tapes I meant to purchase. I opened it up to find a large book instead. It was a book by Fred Price about tithing. There was a note, too, politely explaining that I couldn’t actually purchase things with the tithe, but that here was a book that would help me understand tithing better.

I read the book from cover to cover and referred to it many times over the years. I wonder where that book is right now. It was such a good resource and I think it mysteriously disappeared in my early years of marriage.

Now, that’s how I learned how to tithe. I learned because someone took the time to teach me. They could have taken my ‘measly’ five naira tithe and ignored me and my note. It was such a small amount of money, after all – certainly not worth the book and the postage back then. But they took the time, bless their hearts, and sowed a seed that has absolutely flourished over the years. The message that their actions impressed on my teenage heart was that giving was so important that they were prepared to spend their money to ensure that I learned how to do it. Again, it all goes back to proper teaching.

So do I give my tithe? The answer is a big ‘YES!’  I’ve been a serious tither ever since that day. Just not publicly.



Monday, 27 May 2013

Should I meet with the other woman?


Since the beginning of the year, I’ve noticed a sort of heightened interest in the subject of ‘The Other Woman.’ Search words around this subject have brought quite a number of readers to the blog in 2013, keeping the ‘Running into The Other Woman’ post in second place (in terms of page views) for a while now. The question of whether to meet with the other woman or not is apparently one that many women grapple with.

I’ve already talked here (http://remembering-my-journey.blogspot.com/2012/05/running-into-other-woman.html) about my own experience with such a meeting. The fact that several women who end up on this blog wonder if they should have this sort of meeting makes me ask myself if I would deliberately seek ‘the other woman’ out if I had to do it all over again. In my case, it hadn’t really occurred to me to do so, but maybe the thought would’ve eventually crossed my mind over time. I suppose I had some unreal expectations because ‘the other woman’ that I had the opportunity to meet with was a good friend. I presumed she knew me well enough for us to actually be able to talk things out: how things went wrong, where things went wrong, etc. I informed her via phone about what I knew and then left the ball in her court. I expected her to reach out to me to ‘clear her name up.’ Some weeks later, she did request a meeting with me. I’m convinced that the idea of having this meeting was not hers – or at least wasn’t hers alone. Today, I see it as just one part of a lengthy, well-orchestrated cover-up plan between both of them. At the time, though, in my mind, meeting with her would be helpful to me in several ways:

  1. It would provide me with the missing pieces of the puzzle that my disintegrating marriage had become (since she might feel comfortable sharing critical information with me that my spouse at the time did not).
  2. It would help resolve the obsessive, maniacal emotions I was experiencing (these had really become an unwelcome burden and I thought her honest input would help remedy the chemical imbalance that I was sure was occurring in my brain).
  3. It would bring closure to an absolutely crazy situation (Not complete closure – never that. But a measure of closure that could keep me going).
 I felt this need to tie up loose ends in this way (i.e., through a face-to-face meeting) before saying good-bye to my relationship with her forever.

An old pastor of mine pointed out that trying to dig up the truth in this matter was a waste of my time. It wouldn’t bring closure, anyway, he argued. And leaving a little bit of doubt was a good thing, in his opinion. In his mind, not being 100 % sure about what happened was a positive thing; an iota of doubt would help me forge ahead if I decided to stay in the marriage.

I disagreed. But only because if I was going to have any marriage at all, this time, it would have to be a ‘real’ one.  I didn’t want any more stuff buried, or hidden, or closeted – neither on my part, nor on the part of the person I was married to. I couldn’t take it anymore. I wanted to know exactly what I was dealing with so I could actually deal with it. This is why the truth was so important to me in this situation.

I don’t think that meeting with ‘the other woman’ is a panacea, though. It’s not for everybody, either. Doing so was helpful for me, personally, but not in the ways that I expected, necessarily. I was fortunate that the meeting was not just with her, but with my then husband as well. On the surface of things, the actual meeting was a disaster, but it did one really important thing for me: It gave me a chance to see these two people, who had been so important to me, one last time. I had to see them for myself, one more time. I also had to give them a chance to ‘do better,’ just in case this is what they really wanted to do, but just didn’t know how. It gave me a chance to listen to what they didn’t say – and that was as important (if not more so) than what they did say. I realize, too, that having this opportunity to observe the dynamics between the two of them on that day, was priceless. All of these things were part of the process of 'seeing' them for the last time.

This meeting also helped me redefine ‘closure.’ In situations like this, it’s probably rare for closure to play out the way we expect it to. If we are open to embracing a more flexible definition of the term, then we can definitely have a sufficient measure of closure. Just enough to ensure that we don’t remain at a standstill in our lives, but can really move on. A few missing pieces from a puzzle need not take away from the general portrait that the puzzle provides. With most of the pieces available, you can see the put-together puzzle for what it is. The devil isn’t always in the details. Sometimes, the bigger picture is all you really need.

So, should you meet with the other woman?

If this is even a question for you and the opportunity arises, then I don’t see why not. If your heart tells you that you need it, then you probably do, no matter the outcome. You never know, your meeting could turn out like this: http://divorced-diva.blogspot.com/2010/06/lesson-in-forgiveness.html. Or, it could turn out less satisfactorily. Even then, if you dig beneath the surface of that experience, there are gems to be found. Just be prepared to be open, flexible, and to go with the flow.

Warm hugs and good luck!

Sunday, 19 May 2013

Conversations with my mother


I’ve been meaning to blog about the process of turning a large proportion of this blog’s content into a book. I still mean to and will absolutely do so; I just haven’t found the time. May has been such a crazy-busy month.

One of the things I will say about the process in the meantime is that I was introduced to my editor a couple of months ago; the editor has done the first review of Book Draft 1 and sent back comments, which I recently addressed before sending Draft 2 back. In the very first set of comments, a key message to me was that I would have to get written permission from the identifiable people in the book to actually use their words. As you can imagine, as I absorbed this message, I wondered what I had gotten myself into.

One of the identifiable people happens to be my mother, whom I’ve written about and whose words I use in the ‘Permission from my mother’ post (http://remembering-my-journey.blogspot.com/2012/03/permission-from-my-mother.html).

I immediately emailed practically all of the other identifiable people, sharing the excerpts that involved them and asking for their written permission. With my mother, though, I held off until this week. I should also say that the editor’s comments included encouragements to say more, to go deeper on certain issues. After I’d fleshed out ‘Permission from my mother’ a bit, based on the feedback, I was really reluctant to have my mother read it. I just wasn’t absolutely sure how she’d react. I finally forwarded it to my sister on Monday or Tuesday this week, though, and asked her to print it out and have my mother read it for the first time.

By Wednesday, I sent my sister a one-sentence, nervous email, totally on edge:

‘Did she read it?’

She hadn’t.

My sister forgot to give it her. There were just too many distractions that day because my mother had all these impromptu doctor’s appointments, etc.

I got a two-sentence email from my sister the next day, though:

‘I gave it to her this morning. Give her a call.’

Uh-oh.

This was really nerve-wracking.

‘Why?’ I replied. ‘What’d she say?’

‘She was reading it when I left this morning,’ my sister explained.

Oh, Lord.

I took a deep breath and called my mother. She didn’t pick up.

I panicked and called my sister: ‘She didn’t pick up. I hope she’s okay …’

‘Of course, she is,’ my sister said impatiently. ‘She’s probably just on the other line. She’s going to say ‘yes,’ anyway. Calm down.’

I hung up, unconvinced. I decided to focus on my two million deadlines at work and get back to being on edge later.

I called my mother again that evening.

As usual, it took her some seconds to figure out which one of her children was on the phone. This ritual never fails to amuse me. I suppose with six children – four of them, girls who probably sound sort of alike – it’s easy to get us mixed up.

I nervously asked about her health and we chatted about this for about five minutes. This was followed by a pregnant pause. It’s hard to explain why I felt this way – extremely uneasy. I’d asked several other people for permission to use their words from actual conversations we’d had, after all, and they had all said ‘yes.’ I suppose my mother’s approval (which her permission symbolized to me) meant more to me than I ever realized.

‘Well, what did you think?’ I finally asked her – in my mind.

As if she had heard me, she said quietly: ‘I’ve read what you wrote.’

She said it in Igbo, suddenly switching the language with which we had begun our conversation.

I exhaled.

I didn’t reply. I couldn’t reply. I listened carefully with my ears pricked up, trying to use her verbal cues to picture what her expression was like.

After some seconds of silence, she said quietly, in Igbo: ‘You wrote well.’

I exhaled again, blinking back unexpected tears.

I finally spoke out loud: ‘Thank you.’

I said it in English.

I could’ve said much more, but I sensed that it wasn’t necessary. Without being verbose, we were having probably the most important conversation we’d ever had in my life. My sister later said – and I agreed – that those three, simple words (‘You wrote well.’) were high praise, coming from my mother. They actually seemed to hold deeper meaning, in Igbo, than they would have in English. In my mind, in Igbo, the words referred not just to the quality of the writing, but to the importance of the message conveyed by the writing as well.

Ordinarily, the fact that my mother carried out this entire conversation practically, in our language, shouldn’t be remarkable. However, my parents never really spoke to their children in Igbo, and so her doing so now made me wonder if there was any significance. The most my mother would do, typically, is give a, brief, one-sentence instruction in Igbo – you know: ‘Get me this’ or ‘Go get me that.’ So it was very unusual for her to be addressing me in Igbo throughout the conversation.

So unusual was it, that as she spoke, I wondered whether the choice of language was a conscious or sub-conscious decision. I knew the subject of conversation was extremely sensitive for her. It’s one thing to talk about other people, but talking about your own daughter – talking to her about her own divorce must be extremely difficult. And so, at first I thought that in choosing to speak in Igbo (a language she never actually speaks to me in), she was using the language as a sort of barrier between me and her raw feelings. It must have just been too close for comfort – a bit too overwhelming. And then I changed my mind and thought perhaps she just needed to speak in the language she’s most comfortable with, and so her first language made the most sense. I don’t know.

‘In our days,’ she continued, ‘that’s just how it was. You didn’t talk about those things. You couldn’t talk about such things. You just kept quiet. That’s how it was.’

I nodded understandingly on the phone, reaching out with my heart to the woman she once was decades ago as a young bride.

And just as we had made this rare connection, my mother brought us abruptly back to reality (the reality of our relationship), saying:

‘You got what you wanted, now.’

My heart sank momentarily and then I burst out laughing. Good ole Mummy, I thought. You just had to ruin the moment, didn’t you? LOL.

I thought to myself that perhaps this was yet another measure to ensure that we didn’t get too close for comfort. Of course, with my knack for over-interpreting things, I could be totally wrong.

‘I wouldn’t say I got what I wanted. I just did what I had to do. If I had stayed and gotten HIV, what would you have said? That I got what I wanted?’

I listened patiently without surprise as she swung (in her characteristic fashion) like a pendulum, back in my corner, re-hashing stories of the many she knew back home with ‘malaria’ that wasn’t really malaria. I continued to listen, bracing myself for the time when she would, like a pendulum, swing back to her earlier position.

She spent some minutes lamenting over what good people my in-laws were, and how she couldn’t understand how I had hand-picked the ‘wrong’ brother to marry. I patiently pointed out that the problem might not have been that I married the ‘wrong’ man; the problem could simply be that he married the ‘wrong’ woman. It could simply be that his brothers are married to women that are very different from me. Who knows? They may have had similar experiences as me without talking about it. Not to suggest that they have – I’m just saying. I pointed out that in my days, it’s still rare to really talk about these things, so her generation really isn’t all that different. Maybe I’m just an outlier. If I had just kept mum, I would still seem like the ‘right’ woman, and he would seem like the ‘right’ man. What’s happened has happened, so let’s just move on, I urged.

In the end, she didn’t actually indicate verbally that I had her permission to use her words, and although I didn’t actually ask, I sensed that I had it. The next day, my sister emailed me back a scanned copy of the ‘Permission from my mother’ excerpt. My mother’s signature was on it. She had signed it, indicating the date: May 17, 2013.

I marveled that her hand-writing was still the same after all these years. My mother is in her seventies now. Her beautiful, neat, cursive hand-writing stood out from the page almost like art work. I thought about what a stark contrast this was to my absolutely hideous, chicken scratch writing.

My mother and I definitely have our differences. Apart from our shared natural shyness, we are really nothing alike. Both of my parents firmly believe(d) I am my father’s mother reincarnated. This idea is way to spooky for me and far too removed from my own belief system for me to have ever given it much thought. But I am aware that this belief on my parents’ part informed their individual relationships with me. To my father, I was the mother he adored; to my mother, I have always been the mother-in-law whom I never met, but who allegedly made her life a living hell.

All the more reason why I’m grateful we’ve come as far as we have in our relationship ‘second time around.’