Climbing the social ladder...an observation

So I woke up this morning with a blog in my head about agendas and self-confidence. Here it starts. (As I may finish it in town this morning waiting for Steve...)
I have found that most people in California have an agenda. Not only do they have an agenda, but they feel they must feed it to you within the first five minutes, sort of like a screening process. Then if you pass this initial screening, (whatever it is they are looking for/at), you may proceed to another conversation and perhaps a drink.

I found this to be odd. I completely disagree with the idea that you must be a clone of the person you are speaking to in order to be worthy of their attention. Okay, clone is perhaps too strong a word, but let me juxtapose this to the way we Midwesterners are raised...

When you come to Michigan and you walk up to a blue-collar person, the initial conversation is light. Yes, someone might ask what you do, but they do not carry a portable soapbox and a speechwriter. They will not ask you what you thought of Newt Gingrich agreeing (however briefly) with John Kerry on environmental policies and then subsequently retracting everything he said. A Midwestern blue-collar instead will ask, "Would you like a drink?" They may ask you where you work, or what city you are from. If you say you are from out-of-state, they are respectful and interested. They may tease you but they will not cut you. If you ae local, they will not ask which local non-profit organization you subscribe to. They do not care how much money you make or where you bought your clothes, for themost part. (There are exceptions, but this is not the general rule, I think.) Instead, they will probably welcome you and introduce you to everyone they know. Proudly.

To a Californian, this is tantamout to watching either toddlers in action or an undiscovered, uncivilized tribe welcome the white man. There is a mix of amusement, condescension, and "pinch-your-cheeks" sort of affection for these activities. Let me highlight the condescension for a momnet, since it is what sparked this blog...

I caught my sister pouncing on me in front of her friends. I made one innocuous comment, and she turned to me and said, and I quote: "That's because people havent been EDUCATED about it..." I cocked an eyebrow, looked her dead in the face and laughed. My response was, "Oh, no you did NOT just categorize me as a backwoods Midwesterner." The smile on my face diverted the rest.

Everyone laughed. Even her. Had she known me, she would have heard that my initial laugh was the one that my friends call "edgy". This means that this conversation could go very, very badly. You have stepped in my bubble, irritated me, or completely insulted me to the core. And this is your only warning shot. In short, I WAS categorized as some unlettered country oaf. How amusing...and offensive.

So I started thinking that perhaps there is something missing in the California lifestyle: acceptance. They preach it, they market it, and then they absolutely lie through their teeth about it. They are just as bad as they say we are. Midwesterners may have a rep for ostracizing those who are different (which to us, entails sexual orientation, eclecticism, and sometimes ethnicities); tell me how I am not different from a Californian--what have they been trying to do since I got here? Everyone wants me to be someone else. I understand personal growth, but why am I the wierd one versus the dude dressed as an Easter Basket? Since when did egocentrism become a regional phenomenon?

When I brought up this issue (the agenda issue) I was greeted with the statement that there are too many people in California and the city for you to talk to to waste your time conversing with someone you are not going to have a connection with. What connection? Your political beliefs? Your views on the use of greywater in horticulture? Your profession? What ever happened to the value of human experience and diversity? Why should you agree with me on all those things? Yes, I recognize that there are critical points unpon which a couple may have to agree. But I have generally subscribed to the belief that there must be balance. A blue-collar worker CAN be coupled with a professional. An intellectual CAN marry a person who works with their hands. A dreamer needs a practical base, and a straight-eyed realist needs inspiration. What is so crazy about that idea, that we as humans are more than a sum of our political stances and personal networks?

Apparently, it is absurd. And idealistic. Well fuck me for being an idealist, then. I find that some of the most fascinating observations on the human condition have come from custodial engineers, shipping and receiving technicians, hi-lo drivers, gang members, paralegals, ex-convicts, and starving artists moonlighting as office bitches. I value the role of the intellectual in society. But without the balance of realism and struggle from what they label the "common man", our views are skewed and without base in the real world. To me, the intellectual serves humanity, and that includes the lowest human in the social structure as well as the money people. There's my agenda...want a drink?