Over a rather pricey and tasty dinner last weekend the topic of long term spousal travel (couples together more than 15 years) and “travel divorce moments” came up as a topic.
Now for those not in the know go here and read this over 1,000 times. For those of us in the long term category read on.
In this particular case I was asked MO on two events that provided divorce moment rage on a trip to the Scottish Scotch country. In effect who had “hand” in the overall handling of the situation?
And no, none of these were the result of too many wee drams of the good stuff.
First was what I call an operational incident. The scenario is as the couple is traveling the dirt and mud rows of Scotland seeking the next Scotch-ery (trademarked). Whilst driving on a particularly challenging dirt road the rental car (Ford something or other and that is really not the point anyway) hit a mud puddle. The man is driving the woman is jabbering… um, riding in the passenger seat. First let’s just say the odds of hitting a mud puddle on a dirt road in Scotland are easily calculable and even to be expected. Hence, mud hits the windshield, Driver and Passenger lose vision of the road ahead and the Driver reaches to turn on the windshield wiper. Here is where the trouble starts.
The Driver, according to the view of the Passenger is “fumbling” and “swerving” generally placing the Passenger in mortal danger and not effectively executing the task of turning on the wipers to clear the windshield as instructed by the Passenger. In fact since the Passenger owns a car that is “essentially the same car” the Passenger was upset the driver did not “listen” to the “coaching.”
The Driver, ITO, maintains his focus and after several seconds (or an hour depending on who you believe) manages to turn on the wipers, clear the windshield and continue with, as he said. “Remarkable pluck, and aplomb.”
Now, the Passenger demands the vehicle be stopped at the next town, exits and goes into a pub to shun the Driver for the aforementioned mud puddle incident.
Ok who IMO had hand?
The Driver. Why? Simple, no matter what the Passenger claims when an electro-mechanical emergency situation arises the Driver (a man) is genetically programmed to resolve it, even if it costs him his love, or his life. Even if the Passenger is the inventor of the electro-mechanical device in question, a man is wired at his core to shut down unnecessary senses to focus on the electro-mechanical task at hand. No amount of “coaching” will be heard. Literally all of a man’s senses that are not relevant to the task are shut down to redirect any available cycles to the part of his brain dedicate to this type of problem solving, and this part of the brain is called, and is Latin now; Thomasisis Edicanius. The issue here is not really who had hand, but man’s inability to evolve his primal brain functions in electro-mechanical emergencies. Not his fault and the passenger should know this.
Situation Two is a logistical incident. Whilst connecting in Pittsburgh (believe it or not Pittsburgh is not the problem here) from a long international flight, through US customs onto the connecting domestic flight the Passenger from the story above (FTSA), inadvertently, removed their Bag Tags which would, and I emphasize would, have resulted in a long drawn out process to recover the bags had they gone into the luggage hold without tags on the connecting domestic flight. If you have traveled internationally and checked bags you know you need to reclaim your bag after your international flight at the connections baggage claim and haul them over to the domestic connections baggage transfer point to be checked into the connecting flight. If you do not do this, the bag is held or sent somewhere, on purpose.
So what happened?
Realizing the error with respect to the baggage tags the Passenger FTSA began to reach for the bags to reattach the tags and in the only point each party agrees on the Driver FTSA said;
“What did you that for?”
(Insert jet lagged, too much quality time together, Type A, control freak, argument here.)
Now IMO the person FTSA who has hand in this situation is the Passenger. Why?
C’mon. Any man who has been married for any period of time would have watched those bags go into the connecting flights abyss and said nothing, nada. Like watching a good buddy pop a hammy trying to sprint to first in a C league softball game on an anorexic liner to left knowing his buddy is thinking double with a fitness level of a single.
“Gee honey, I didn’t see it. No worries I will help find them when we get home.”
In this case it is much more gratifying to let the Passenger get hand and then enjoy the ride home as the major point here is being right is not want you do. Doing the right thing is better, even without hand.
Now for those not in the know go here and read this over 1,000 times. For those of us in the long term category read on.
In this particular case I was asked MO on two events that provided divorce moment rage on a trip to the Scottish Scotch country. In effect who had “hand” in the overall handling of the situation?
And no, none of these were the result of too many wee drams of the good stuff.
First was what I call an operational incident. The scenario is as the couple is traveling the dirt and mud rows of Scotland seeking the next Scotch-ery (trademarked). Whilst driving on a particularly challenging dirt road the rental car (Ford something or other and that is really not the point anyway) hit a mud puddle. The man is driving the woman is jabbering… um, riding in the passenger seat. First let’s just say the odds of hitting a mud puddle on a dirt road in Scotland are easily calculable and even to be expected. Hence, mud hits the windshield, Driver and Passenger lose vision of the road ahead and the Driver reaches to turn on the windshield wiper. Here is where the trouble starts.
The Driver, according to the view of the Passenger is “fumbling” and “swerving” generally placing the Passenger in mortal danger and not effectively executing the task of turning on the wipers to clear the windshield as instructed by the Passenger. In fact since the Passenger owns a car that is “essentially the same car” the Passenger was upset the driver did not “listen” to the “coaching.”
The Driver, ITO, maintains his focus and after several seconds (or an hour depending on who you believe) manages to turn on the wipers, clear the windshield and continue with, as he said. “Remarkable pluck, and aplomb.”
Now, the Passenger demands the vehicle be stopped at the next town, exits and goes into a pub to shun the Driver for the aforementioned mud puddle incident.
Ok who IMO had hand?
The Driver. Why? Simple, no matter what the Passenger claims when an electro-mechanical emergency situation arises the Driver (a man) is genetically programmed to resolve it, even if it costs him his love, or his life. Even if the Passenger is the inventor of the electro-mechanical device in question, a man is wired at his core to shut down unnecessary senses to focus on the electro-mechanical task at hand. No amount of “coaching” will be heard. Literally all of a man’s senses that are not relevant to the task are shut down to redirect any available cycles to the part of his brain dedicate to this type of problem solving, and this part of the brain is called, and is Latin now; Thomasisis Edicanius. The issue here is not really who had hand, but man’s inability to evolve his primal brain functions in electro-mechanical emergencies. Not his fault and the passenger should know this.
Situation Two is a logistical incident. Whilst connecting in Pittsburgh (believe it or not Pittsburgh is not the problem here) from a long international flight, through US customs onto the connecting domestic flight the Passenger from the story above (FTSA), inadvertently, removed their Bag Tags which would, and I emphasize would, have resulted in a long drawn out process to recover the bags had they gone into the luggage hold without tags on the connecting domestic flight. If you have traveled internationally and checked bags you know you need to reclaim your bag after your international flight at the connections baggage claim and haul them over to the domestic connections baggage transfer point to be checked into the connecting flight. If you do not do this, the bag is held or sent somewhere, on purpose.
So what happened?
Realizing the error with respect to the baggage tags the Passenger FTSA began to reach for the bags to reattach the tags and in the only point each party agrees on the Driver FTSA said;
“What did you that for?”
(Insert jet lagged, too much quality time together, Type A, control freak, argument here.)
Now IMO the person FTSA who has hand in this situation is the Passenger. Why?
C’mon. Any man who has been married for any period of time would have watched those bags go into the connecting flights abyss and said nothing, nada. Like watching a good buddy pop a hammy trying to sprint to first in a C league softball game on an anorexic liner to left knowing his buddy is thinking double with a fitness level of a single.
“Gee honey, I didn’t see it. No worries I will help find them when we get home.”
In this case it is much more gratifying to let the Passenger get hand and then enjoy the ride home as the major point here is being right is not want you do. Doing the right thing is better, even without hand.
Comments