This is unfortunate, but necesssary today. My wife and I have had a very relaxed week of food, beginning with pancakes a week ago — primal pancakes, so acceptable — and then continuing through a whole spate of eating things that are either borderline or, as of yesterday, not even that. It’s a familiar slope, and it’s one I’m keen to avoid — it’s all too easy to just let ourselves slide from here, and then before you know it, everything we’ve done over the last two months is suddenly gone.
Unfortunately, I’m really not very good at this role.
My wife had been planning to bake me things today — things that I like, that I enjoy, and that are again just sitting on that borderline. I could technically justify it all. And my wife, who is feeling like she wants to relax today, was just about ready to go out and grab what she really wanted for lunch, and end up chowing down on a pastrami sandwich (from the Large Sandwich Shop I mentioned in an earlier post). And I’m very good at letting that happen. I like her to be comfortable, and happy, as much as possible — and so when she’s starting to want to go off, and looking into the borderline foods, I usually just smile, nod, and accept it. It’s fine with me, usually. I like the food, after all.
But today, I’m playing the villain, and saying no.
She’ll go along with me, if I decide not to eat — and we’ve talked before about how, sometimes, it’s only possible for us to keep it together because we aren’t both caving in and wanting to eat the wrong things at the same time as each other. So today, I have to refuse to eat the things we’re trying to steer clear of — as much as anything else, so that she won’t do it. Because if we give each other carte blanche, we’ll tear down all our work in a heartbeat. And once that’s done, it’s easy to look at the lost work and feel depressed and hopeless. It’s really not a good cycle. So I have to break it.
Not least because, if I’m honest, I don’t entirely want to. And I know all too well how dangerous that is.
And a final P.S. about the picture…
The picture comes from a movie that was poking fun at the trope — in fact, the damsel-tied-to-the-tracks was hardly used in silent films at all. The story actually came from a 19th century play that preceded silent movies, and it exists mainly because it worked well with stage trickery, since you didn’t need an actual train. However, film-makers had a lot more room to work, and could use more tricks — so although the scene was very popular in stage productions, it really never made it big in the movies (except in parodies, which is where almost all the clips and pictures come from)
Also, contrary to the details of the familiar trope, the play actually featured a tied-up man being rescued by the heroine — and that seemingly-reversed situation was actually very common back when this plot device, or similar ones, were used. It seems Hollywood of old had no issues at all with a man being rescued by a woman.