What some may view as a minor event has turned into a real flaw in our marriage. While driving down the Massachusetts Turnpike recently and going at freeway speed in the center lane, my husband opened the passenger side window and threw a banana peel onto the road. I immediately expressed my displeasure, telling him that I am opposed to littering, that he is setting a bad example for the 13-year-old boy in the car, and that I, as the driver, would be the one to get the ticket. What would happen if everyone started dumping leftover products on the roads? It is slippery, dangerous and just plain dirty.
My husband’s response was that the banana peel would biodegrade and he said, “I’m an adult so I’ll do what I want.” I responded that the shell would not biodegrade on asphalt. When we got home, I sent him an article explaining why this behavior is dangerous and unacceptable. (It could attract animals onto the road, putting them in danger. And it’s considered littering and carries a fine.) I also sent him the Massachusetts law that made this illegal. His only comment was, “Don’t you have anything better to do with your time?” He refuses to admit that he made a mistake or to change his behavior. We have reached an impasse on this issue. What do you think? — Theresa, New York
From the ethical:
Throwing that banana peel out the car window was wrong, for reasons you expressed at the time, and for others as well. Yes, it will biodegrade eventually (even on asphalt, which is not a sterile environment), but not necessarily any time soon. Bird lovers warn us that pesticide-treated fruit peels can be bad for the creatures that eat them. And no one remembers the discarded shells in Paul Verhoeven’s movie “Spetters”? Things go very wrong for the motorcyclist who hits him right in the face. Now you might be tempted to throw this item on the breakfast table, or text her husband a link, and say, “See? The ethicist agrees with me.”
But this isn’t a story about proper disposal of banana peels; in this matter, her husband no longer claims to be right. It seems that two things happen. First, she is obviously sensitive to criticism (perhaps especially from you, her spouse, and perhaps especially when she expresses herself in front of the child). Her pride has been hurt; he does not want to reward you with the concession you seek. Given this dynamic, the only surprise is that a “fault line” did not open sooner.
Second, however, he complains that you are making too much of a minor misdeed. Here your stubborn polluter is right: it’s not so much his initial response as his thoroughly investigated insistence on his rightness. Spouses make mistakes. It’s okay to point them out, even to be upset when you don’t acknowledge them. However, in a relationship that works, you know when to call it quits and move on; you do not insist on a full admission of guilt. Facts matter, but from an ethical perspective, kindness counts too. To the extent that your spouse feels harassed in this way, slamming a newspaper, physically or digitally, will only confirm your judgment and further escalate tensions.
If you really find yourself alienated from your husband, you may want to consider couples therapy. Both her and his responses suggest that there may be deeper issues in her relationship. A marriage that is on solid ground should not slip on a banana peel.
readers respond
The question above was from a reader who discovered that his late father had been discharged from the army in the 1950s for “homosexual tendencies.” This reader thought he was the only one in the family who knew this secret and wrote: “My mother is 80 years old and she is in poor health. I have decided not to tell you what I have learned; I don’t see any possible benefit at this point in her life. But should I share this revelation with my immediate siblings after my mother has passed away? If the situation were reversed, I would like to know.”
In its response, Ethicist noted: “In September 2021, the Department of Veterans Affairs made it clear that service members who were discharged due to their sexual orientation should be considered veterans and may be eligible for the various associated benefits. …But the terms of your father’s separation don’t tell you much about him. Perhaps the accusation was without foundation. Maybe he was bisexual. …Without knowing your mother, I won’t hesitate in your decision not to tell her. Maybe he knows a lot more about your father than you think. Or maybe what you’ve learned would surprise him and he wouldn’t know what to do with it. Generally, people have a right to the truth about important matters in their lives. But what you have here is a piece of information whose significance is difficult to assess. In the meantime, try to secure any veteran survivor benefits owed to your mother.” (Reread the full question and answer here.)
⬥
The letter writer should tell her mother. It is possible that she already knows this, and that she can clarify and add more information that answers some of her children’s questions. If she doesn’t know, learning about it can answer some of her own questions. Being 80 years old does not deprive her of her rights as an adult to fully understand her life experience. — Debra
⬥
I love that the ethicist’s response. informs the author of the letter of the uncollected benefits! What a great revelation and opportunity to share the findings with the brothers in a non-inflammatory way. — smooth
⬥
Surviving Spouse Benefits The application process was long and complex when I applied on my mother’s behalf over 10 years ago, but it was definitely worth it. She paid a quarter of her assisted living costs for more than six years. Challenge the discharge and fight for the benefits. — Phillies
⬥
In fact, there is a very clear reason Do not share this information with your family: you would be giving away your father. Even though he is deceased and you’ll never get the real story, it’s always disrespectful. She wanted sexuality private from him for a reason. Keep his secret and collect his pension. — heloise
⬥
As a veteran member of the US NavyI personally discharged quite a few “gay” service members who just couldn’t adjust to military life or were ready to go. While this program harmed our lesbian, gay and bisexual service members and affected mission readiness, it also provided a “loophole” for those who wanted a different life and were willing to accept a less than honorable discharge to get it. The writer’s father might not have been gay or bisexual. We’ll never know, and getting people out is never right, even if we did know. — Ember
—————————————————-
Source link