Monday, January 22, 2007

Glen and McNutt's Second Opinion - Episode I

In the spirit of Heel Heat, Director's Cut and the Predictaculars, I bring you another special Bloggin' Collabo. That's right, I continue to be an unoriginal hack and rely on my friends do do more of my work.

This time I team with my good friend Ryan McNutt who is also posting this on his blog, McNutt Against the Music. We decide that we are going to try and help you, our readers, with advice. We are taking some very real requests for advice and offering our suggestions on them. The two of us can only really agree on the fact that we love The Arcade Fire, so naturally we are not going to be debating on these issues.

So without further ado, here is McNutt to introduce this column...

"In my experience, the only thing more important than making a point is making a counter-point, and in that spirit we present "Second Opinion," an adversarial advice column. It's reflective counsel with raging combat. It's snappy rebuttals taking priority over actually answering people's questions. It's down-to-earth issues with through-the-roof excitement. It's "Dear Abby" meets "Crossfire"!"

...and now, Second Opinion!!!!


(Credit for logo goes to McNutt)

Question #1

I am in a muddle. I love two men. One is my ex.-boyfriend who wants to come back to me, the other is my current boyfriend. Both are lovely men, but feel more spiritually attached to my ex. I am unable to make a decision. Do you have any tips?

-- Torn in Toronto

Glen says:

Well Torn, you certainly are in a tough situation. I think that we have all been in your situation at some point or another, so I really feel your pain. I think that you are so hung up on being with one of them that you are failing to notice an obvious third option. Being with none of them. Obviously you and your ex have some compatibility issues or you would still be together right? And you obviously do not feel quite so strongly for your new boyfriend or else you would not be so torn. There is nothing wrong with keeping fond memories of your ex and even staying friends, but what is in the past should remain in the past, or else you won't have much of a future.

You are probably thinking that life would be perfect if you could just combine the two of them right? Like if someone was as sensitive as the new boy, but as exciting as the old one right? Well you are not going to change either of these guys, but there might just be the perfect combination out there somewhere, waiting to make a spiritual connection with a woman like you. I say let go of both of them to not let that perfect guy pass you by. I know that it is a hard thing to do, but I am sure that you can do it!!

I'm pulling for you,

-- Glen

Ryan says:

Torn, it's metaphor time. You're a starving child desperate for a slice of cake, and it just so happens that the Lords of Homemade Baked Goods have placed two moist, delicious pieces of cake right in front of you. Which do you choose? The answer should be obvious to anyone with a stomach attached to their brain - both of them. Glen, on the other hand, would advise you to sit there and starve to death. Whose advice are you going to take?

There is no "perfect combination" out there, Torn, short of drugging both of these men in the middle of the night and stitching their bodies together into some sort of "FrankenLover." Do you really want to throw both of them aside and spend your days as a Celebate Jesus, dying lonely for the sins of these two men's faults? Keep dating both of them; maybe alternate beetwen them bi-weekly or even divide up the days of the week. You can tell them if you want to, or keep the whole double-life a secret. Treat the whole thing like one giant spy game, complete with codewords and high-tech gadgets. The possibilities are endless!

I think the point that I'm trying to get at here is that Glen wants starving children to die.

-- RRM

Question #2

I met a wonderful and beautiful girl, and we've been off and on dating (mainly "on") for about three and a half years now while attending school. Here's the problem: I'm an atheist who questions everything and has a very strong foundation regarding my beliefs. My girlfriend, on the other hand, is a Catholic - in my opinion, one who doesn't question her beliefs enough. She was raised Catholic and seems to like it, even if she doesn't practice it. We've talked about having kids, and every time have ended with an argument: She wants to take her kids to church and raise them Catholic, and I won't even consider the thought of having my children raised in a church. At first I thought this was something that we could possibly work out. I stupidly thought that I could possibly convert my scientific-minded, Catholic girlfriend to atheism. But now, I really don't see either one of those things happening. We both love each other and would like to get married, but we can't seem to get over this children issue.


Disbeliever in Dartmouth

Ryan says:

DID, it was a hard lesson to learn, but you've finally realized one of the fundamental realities of a relationship: you're never, ever going to change anyone to fit the mould that you want them to. You got into this relationship under some foolish notion that you could "convert" your girlfriend to atheism; did you stop to think that maybe SHE thought that she could "convert" you to Catholicism as well? Either way, both of you were horribly wrong: you were up against belief systems that have been built over years of thought and tradition and had no chance of budging. You can't change people, DID, you can only learn how best to accommodate their beliefs with your own.

So you've got to ask yourself if this religious impasse is a dealbreaker. That's a question only you can answer, but consider this: if kids are going to be part of the equation some day, then either they're going to be going to church with their mother every Sunday or staying home with their father. If both of these options leaves one parent upset, uncompromising and bitter, then how do you expect the relationship to function? In your letter you even refer to the children as "hers" when they hypothetically join her at church. If this is going to be an ongoing, impenetrable source of conflict in this relationship, then maybe it's time to let it go.

-- RRM

Glen says:

Well Disbeliever, I think that you have one clear problem here, a definable lack of faith. No, I don't mean in the church, I mean in yourself, and more specifically, your persuasive abilities. If you put your mind to it, you can convince anyone of anything. The only reason that you haven't been able to convince your girlfriend to leave the church behind is because you have not been trying hard enough. You think it's a bad thing to convince other people? Well the ancient Greeks considered the art of rhetoric to be incredibly important, in fact, along with dialectic and grammar, it made up the original liberal arts, or trivium. Would you say that Socrates and Aristotle where wrong? I think not.

Disbeliever, you just need to find the right angle. People will do anything with the right motivation. All you need to do is dangle that proverbial carrot in front of this girl and she will be excommunicated faster than Henry VIII. What is the carrot you ask? Well unfortunately Disbeliever I can not really answer that one. I don't know this woman, but I am sure that it is something. You have to ask yourself what are her likes and dislikes? Her greatest fears and wildest dreams? You need to find someway of connecting the negatives with the church and the positives with your secularism.

There is an old saying that you have heard time and time again, "When the going gets tough, the tough get going", well my friend, you need to decide what you want to do. I say that you need to get tough, while McNutt says that you should back down. If you really do love this girl, than you will see that she is worth fighting for.

In other words, get tough.

-- Glen


That just about does it for this, we hope that you enjoyed it and maybe took some of our advice!!! Look for this to come out a little bit more often.

Ohh and for the record, the views expressed in this column do not actually reflect the views of the people involved. McNutt is far more of a jerk than he portrays himself to be.

Until next time,


1 comment:

Jaques said...

Glen, you look like a predatory homosexual in that photo.