Broconian Law

     Recently, I was asked to elaborate upon the rules of conduct men follow when interacting with each other. Simply put, I was asked to explain the "Bro Code." As I sat, struggling to come up with a response that adequately encapsulated the governing dynamics of male relationships, I was forced to acknowledge that I knew very little about the particulars of the Code beyond hypothetical scenarios I'd discussed with my friends in the past. Later, asking around for the opinions of both men and women (sometimes, an outsider's perspective can be very illuminating), I realized that not one person shared the exact same opinion as to the requirements of the Code when faced with a difficult ethical decision.
     After a good bit of research and opinion-hunting, I've come to the conclusion that the Bro Code is little more than the Superego with a penis. Men half-joke at times, about how there are certain things one man does not do to another. For example, "Do not try to date a woman that a male friend has declared their interest in." This leads to competition between friends, which can become bitter enmity lasting several years depending on the outcome. Another example is "Do not date your best friend's sister." This is a conflict of interest for the best friend and for you, as any difficulties arising within the relationship immediately become the purview of your entire social circle, rather than a private matter.
     Despite how seemingly black-and-white the above examples may seem to be, there are countless more possible choices which fall into an obfuscated area where decisions become a scaled system weighing potential outcomes against anticipated consequences. Here is where individual opinions begin to vary, where lines in the sand are drawn at different points. Every man is different, has unique opinions and boundaries. How then, can any Code of Laws, brotherly or otherwise, truly govern the actions of an entire gender? In short, they can't and don't. Although groups of men may choose similarly when faced with an identical ethical quandry, the responses to situations testing the Bro Code are overall impossible to predetermine. Some men do not care about the consequences of their actions and will not hesitate to sleep with their best friend's sister, or cut their friend out of a potential romance if opportunity presents itself. Those who choose such a path are often maligned by their male peers and, in some cases, ostracized. But, the question then must be asked, "Is such a choice the wrong one?"
     Every person, man or woman, has the right to make their own decisions. Often, we worry about how our choices will affect others, about the ripples we might make in the water. Because of that fear, either indecision is born, allowing for the situation to fester and become a larger problem, or we make the choice that causes us pain, but is the more "noble" from a group perspective. This, then, is the purpose of the Bro Code: To act as a system of checks and balances for men in order to preserve the unity of a social group where it is more important to maintain civility than to risk a collapse of the interpersonal infrastructure.
     I do not mean to imply from my earlier question that I disagree with the importance of the Bro Code's function. I do, however, believe that an inordinate amount of importance is granted to potentially biased interpretations of what is right or wrong between same-sex groups (Aside: Women have their own variant of the Bro Code, colloquially known as the Chick Code. From what I heard and read, infractions are treated much more harshly by women within their own social groups than men do in theirs.) Here then, I return to discussing that "gray area" between an obviously poor choice and an obviously good one. Sure, it's easy to recognize that sleeping with your friend's sister is wrong, but what if you're genuinely attracted to her and (in a perfect world) she feels the same way toward you? Is it worth the risk and the momentous transfiguration of group politics for the chance to have a genuinely fulfilling relationship? In my opinion, I'd say that it is, but that the man interested in the sister should talk to his friend/her brother first, give a little forewarning and maybe warm him up to the idea first.
     Moving even further into the nebulous area between right and wrong, the rules change dramatically when the proximity between two or more men is removed. In essence, when two men from different social circles (perhaps distantly connected through a third or even a fourth party) come into a situation requiring a close examination of the Bro Code for guidance...the Code fails to deliver. There is no clear answer at all, simply the opinions of those involved. The outcome then is decided more by personal morality than by social obligation. The logic sounds cold, but truthfully, any enmity created in situations such as these is far less problematic to handle than an equal measure of ire from a much closer friend. That logic applies beyond the Bro Code's purview to any situation involving social difficulties between individuals or groups.
    As I said, opinions on the gray areas can be incredibly biased. Reaching into my bag of personal experiences, my first real relationship was with a girl who both my best friend and myself were attracted to. As there were only three of us in our little group at the time, this was a big deal. For over a year, I remained quiet while he pursued a romance and was repeatedly denied the opportunity. Finally, it came to light that not only was I interested in her, but the reverse was true as well. Unfortunately, this information came out publicly...with my best friend in the room. (Second aside: This is also the reason I try very hard to avoid ever playing the game Truth or Dare, and if I do, I always choose Dare. Dare is safer, believe me.) I remember how awkward it was, he and I riding back to his house afterward, how when he thought I was asleep he prayed to God and told Him that he hated Him. *Apologies if the pronouns became confusing to follow* My friend and I were not comfortable with each other for the next three years. So, I ask, did I violate the Bro Code? Did I breach etiquette when I took my chance after knowing that my friend had had his? I know that I started off following the Code, but after so long, knowing all that I did, was I in the wrong? Personally, I don't have a damn clue. Thankfully, that time is years and miles away.

The Mandala and the Riddle of Worry

     I consider myself a fairly level-headed individual, but sometimes, I catch my fears sending my thoughts to places I'd rather they left alone. Worries are like stones. Wear away at them long enough and you always find a deeper layer of concern, some personal issue or trouble that you spend most hours of the day subconsciously filing away under the "Shit I Can't Let Affect Me" category. Some problems, that's how you have to address them; push the nagging doubts further down, relax the icy knot in your stomach and keep moving forward.
     Over the years, I've learned to trust my instincts in most cases. Intuition is the greatest provider of common sense that I know of, as long as you're willing to accept the truth of a given situation. Especially when talking with people, it's my intuition that clues me in when there's something truly important to be discussed. Hearing between the lines, I guess you could call it. And there is a part of me that longs to tear apart the obligations of formality and call people out when I can tell there is something on their mind that they're not saying. With my temperament, I'm more inclined to appreciate blunt honesty than any attempt at rhetoric.
     I've gone far enough in trusting my instinct that my own inner monologue has split to represent two distinct aspects of my personality. In my head, when working through a problem or trying to understand another person's perspective (how they might be feeling, how they might react in a situation, the likelihood of particular events occurring, etc.), I can hear my mind as if on autopilot, reading off cues and molding pieces together to arrive at a conclusion which fits the scenario. There is a measure of empathy involved in this; life is not a cold equation.
     The problem I'm getting at, however, is that my judgment is not infallible in these cases, particularly when the charnel house that is my subconscious throws open its doors and all my self-doubt and fears spill out to fight my rational mind for dominance. The intuitive leaps of logic normally made and proven correct when focused on others I am less emotionally attached to become stumbling blocks when amalgamated to my "Expect the worst, hope for the best" outlook. For the people closest to me, the ones I am invested in, this can be a matter of great stress. I have, in the past, convinced myself that my own worst fears were, in fact, reality, by using my instincts to find ways to support my expectations rather than relaxing and accepting that some answers would be uncertain without asking that the truth be given to me by my friends (which complicates the problem when I start relying on that external input as an emotional panacea).
     The term mandala is a Sanskrit word meaning "circle." To give credit where it's due, I ripped that line almost verbatim from Wikipedia for the sake of expediency.  Applied to rational-vs.-irrational thought, I think the mandala is an appropriate representation for the way my (and most) mind snags itself when caught in the gravitas of a worry that has no easy solution. Again, life is not a cold equation (I use that term in reference to a Tom Godwin short story from the mid-1950's. Highly recommended!), yet people-because I'm not the only one who does this-plug their own interpretations, expectations and cues in together as if their problems are mathematical in nature. But the problem with handling worries in that manner is, not only can we not be sure how to find the solution to every problem, but we can't even be confident in knowing every variable well enough to be sure the answers we do settle for are correct.
     Sometimes, it feels like my emotions are the hands shaking the Etch-a-Sketch showing me the whole picture.
     Another interpretation of the mandala is one of a spiraling circle. In true Buddhist fashion, following the path of that circle is meant to lead to deeper understanding. The purpose for my writing of this post tonight was to emotionally purge myself after several hours of co-mingling doubt and rationalization took me down that path, starting from my concerns over the well-being or activities of friends and family, ending finally with my being forced to acknowledge a lingering sense of worry as to my place in the world at the time of this writing. My final thought on the matter before turning to this site was "I am not where I want to be. I am not who I should be." Common enough thoughts, right? Like I said before, these are usually kept in a tightly locked part of my brain with a seal reading "Shit I Can't Let Affect Me."
     In the end, the only answer to the Riddle of Worry is found in waiting. Having patience, realistic expectations and the knowledge that nothing is certain until it's either confirmed by all parties involved, or mentioned on Facebook. The (mutilated) phrase "The journey not the destination" applies here also. In looking for the truth, putting our minds to the metaphorical grindstone and following the mandala's path, we learn to filter out the white noise created when our emotions try to rule our hearts and minds.