In my ‘About Me’ section, I alluded to the similarities between conceptual furniture and lipstick. Yes, both are statement pieces. Furniture changes the dynamics and flow of a space whilst lipsticks add dimension to the face through various colours; matte and metallic finishes.
As consumers, we are able to purchase furniture pieces and lipsticks via a variety of outlets. Manufactured goods are either sent directly to the retailers or more commonly to wholesalers. These wholesalers sell these manufactured goods in large quantities at low prices to the retailers.
In the two scenarios, contracts are an important element for both parties as it ensures expectations are explicitly communicated; the terms that are negotiated and the price a party agrees to sell economic resources to another at a fixed cost. In this way, if there is a contract breach, the contract is legally enforceable in a court of law. Both parties can use that contract as a tool to safeguard their resources.
This got me thinking – what if contracts were used as a tool in personal relationships? I don’t mean agreements such as prenups that are used to establish financial rights of each spouse in the event of a divorce. I’m talking about using a contract to safeguard ‘emotional resources’ in a relationship. Hence, if a party failed to provide the emotional support that was originally agreed upon in the contract, that same party would be held accountable in a court of law and could potentially be prosecuted.
This got me thinking again – in this court of law, what would be the prosecutor’s closing statement to the jury?
‘Ladies and Gentlemen, Is rejection avoidable? If one party rejects another party, who is to blame? The rejectee or the Rejecter? Let’s start again, how much self – reflection does one have to go through to feel whole again after being rejected? Who has the answers to these fucking questions? C’mon Jury, I dare you to answer at least one question.
Yes, you’ve guessed it, the rejectee is angry. Anger doesn’t quite cover what they are feeling. Enraged, confused, infuriated to the limit. The rejectee doesn’t say anything or act out when the Rejecter is suffocating them, suffocating them with their presence and messages. The rejectee understands them, there for them, listens to them, cries with them but the minute the rejectee starts needing them that little bit more, the Rejector shuts the rejectee out from their life.
Completely shuts them out, pretend they don’t exist, that they have no impact or relevance to their life. Just like that. Reducing them to nothing. Nada. So again, back to the question, who is to blame? the rejectee or the Rejecter? One means, the rejectee, should have known and understood the dynamics of the relationship prior, right? Right?
Was this contract breached – did the rejectee overstep the limits and boundaries in this contract? Was clinginess and neurotic behaviours only meant for the Rejector, not the rejectee?
Answer these questions! Was the rejectee at fault? Should the rejectee have read the contract thoroughly? The rejectee should have known this relationship was on a fixed -term basis.
They were never permanent.
They should have known the relationship was subjected
only subjected to the Rejector’s terms and conditions, until the Rejector terminated the contract. Without the need of notice.
Was the rejectee at fault? Didn’t they read all the terms and conditions? Where it clearly states, the rejectee agrees to devote their whole working time and attention to the Rejector. Doesn’t it state the rejectee’s performance and conduct will be monitored and the Rejector reserves the right to make any changes in this period?
So, we’re all in agreement then, it must be my fault’