Epiphany. Gratitude. Farewell.

APROPOS TO ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING

In "Wordy and Beautiful...", one of today's posts on Flavorwire by its Literary Editor/Weekend Editor Emily Temple, I discovered Belgian artist Fred Eerdekens who works in light and shadow with the help of paper, wire and other media, including (amazingly) bags of groceries. 

In his own words, Eerdekens says he is after creating "a semantic landscape in which what one had thought of as stable meanings are continually twisted and turned." Wow.

What is Eerdekens asking of us? What is he asking of me as a writer? To consider carefully what I choose to write about...be intentional about what I offer readers...focus on what I mean to express but can't seem to put words to...pay attention to what lurks in the shadows...take responsibility for the implications that my words cast. 

I desperately need to embrace what I found in Eerdekens' word shadows: Time's a-wasting, Sydney: use what time and energy you have to sculpt messages that matter and deliver them in a memorable way.

Taking all that to heart means my saying goodbye to shilly-shallying and this blog. 

Here's my real deal.

What I'm exercised about as a single adult standing on my own two feet is how our society worships and rewards married life and those who subscribe to it. My "Marriage Math" post offers one concrete example. Here's one more for the road.

My employer, like many, subsidizes health insurance for full-time employees. The company pays 85%, leaving each of us to pay 15%. In my case, that amounts to about $8,000 a year that the company pays so that I am more financially secure. Generous. Thank you.

But that formula applies across the board. The financial security of my married colleagues in the plan is subsidized to the tune of $15,000 a year; those with children receive a subsidy of more than $22,000 a year. That's a lot of extra security accorded to some, denied others.

Yes, I tried to convince my employer how unfair this is for single employees. My well-supported proposal for any one of several equitable plans needed due-diligence review by the higher-ups. Fair enough. Yes, all my calculations were correct. Yes, my alternative plans were feasible. But they deep-sixed all of them on the basis that any change would be unfair to married staff. 

What the...?

That experience ended years of procrastinating on doing SOMETHING to put out a wake-up call to single adults, especially young people--and business and government and organized religion--on this and so many other unearned married privileges. 

I now have a book outline. And I can now put together a basic blog that I hope will be a springboard to an actual manuscript, as it was for Rebecca. But not this blog.

Thank you, Rebecca and blogger classmates. Thank you, Emily Temple. Thank you, Fred Eerdekens.

All my best,

Sydney/Sharon 

Marriage Math

Today's mail brought my annual update from Social Security on my estimated benefits at "full" or "early" retirement age--now well past the traditional 65 or 62 for way too many of us. 

Prompted by a reminder for soon-to-be-retired people (don't I wish) that sounded like an invitation to double-dip, I went online to www.ssa.gov and, among other eyebrow-raising factoids, found this provocative statement:

"If your spouse is eligible for retirement benefits on his or her own record we will pay that amount first. But if the benefit on your record is a higher amount, he or she will get a combination of benefits that equals that higher amount." 

This, on the heels of a newsletter from my brokerage company with an entire page on spouse benefits under Social Security that offers this illustration:

For example, the husband could claim spousal benefits on his wife's record once he reaches age 66 (assuming his wife has also claimed benefits). Once he reaches age 70, he switches and claims benefits based on his own record. This allows his benefit to grow and provide more income during his lifetime, as well as maximizes (sic) his wife's survivor benefit if he passes away first.

Does any of this sound fair to you?

We have the right...

Hank Sartin's Singles Bill of Rights published in the Feb 9-15 issue of Time Out Chicago declares the right of the unattached to a safe, happy place to dance solo...price-off or other deals that don't require a tag-along...a good table for one...more. 

Sartin also salutes the Valentine's Day kick off of a new reading series at the Cobra Lounge in Chicago. Next date is April 16. Read about it and an associated blog at Solo in the Second City. 

Thanks to my pal Decker for passing this along.

Singles more engaged

New York University sociology professor Eric Kleinenberg says "One's a Crowd," as reported in The New York Times on February 5."Compared with their married counterparts," Kleinenberg writes, "single people are more likely to spend time with friends and neighbors, go to restaurants and attend art classes and lectures." 

He goes on to say that being more engaged with culture and community is characteristic of single adults, elders included. If that's true, and Kleinenberg points to ample evidence, should singles be better courted by eateries, theaters, schools and recreational programs?  

What's your experience?