A Single Factor

I cheated on my partner early in our relationship. We were newly dating and I was coming out of a polyamorous relationship but my partner and I had agreed to a certain level of monogamy and I violated that. It was a one-time event that I admitted shortly after it happened. I wish it hadn’t happened but the end result was that my partner and I more openly discussed our needs and wants in the relationship and we were able to adjust expectations to match. I wish I had been brave enough and honest enough to have that conversation earlier but I can’t change the past.

I mention this only to be as transparent as possible (as I often am).

Recently I shared a post about a New Yorker article titled “In Defense of Adulterers” (kinda click-baity). The article is a summary of Esther Perel’s relatively new book, “The State of Affairs: Rethinking Infidelity”. I have not read the book yet but I’m sure I will at some point. My post did not really spark much vocal controversy but there was one comment critical of Perel’s viewpoint that I feel is worth addressing. The comment got almost as many likes as the original post, so I assume there are many non-vocal people who agree with it.

So, why in a blog post instead of on Facebook? In short, because I like this better and I find Facebook to be distracting. And I have a unique audience that may not be FB friends with me.

The commenter was absolutely right about some things, including the need for partners to discuss their extra-marital desires openly and come to a conclusion about how to address them, which is generally suppression of desire, destruction of a relationship, or an open relationship. Now, none of these may seem like great options to many people, but life isn’t perfect and the reality is that at some point it is likely that a member of a couple is going to have a crush, lust over, or fall in love with someone else.

There are two interrelated points that the commenter made that I disagree with. The first is “the fact that it generally requires prolonged deception.” There is no evidence of that. He may be right, but he might not. Data about affairs is rarely consistent and we really don’t know what is a “fact” or what it “generally requires”. So, I take issue with grouping all affairs into this one category without evidence. I think that it is possible that many, or even most, cheating occurs similarly to mine, a one-shot mistake.

The commenters conclusion from his (possibly false) assumption is that cheating is “indicative of deeper character flaws”. If his assumption is correct then that is possible, but it might not really be a deep character flaw. It could be depression, addiction, an inability to communicate in the relationship (which could be either partner’s fault), or a plethora of other things that I would hardly categorize as character flaws.

That isn’t to say that cheating is okay in these circumstances, what I’m saying is we do ourselves and our relationships an injustice if we decide to paint any action or view as binary: good or evil, right or wrong. Humans are complex, nuanced, and ever-changing creatures and actions should be taken as a part of the whole instead of one behavior or view becoming their sole identity and the sole thing we measure their worth as a partner with.

Say a man cheats on his wife. He does so often but is always safe and does so in a way that his wife never knows. He is also a wonderful father, a generous member of the community, and in all other areas a perfect husband. Would that family and community be better off if the family is ripped apart because the affair is “unforgivable” (as stated by the commenter)? Is it really true that every affair should be viewed as such an absolute wrong that the person who does it is so deeply flawed that nothing else about their character matters?

I don’t think so. This hypothetical man is absolutely in the wrong, but I think we should still see him as a complete, complex, and flawed human being whose actions won’t change due to prohibition or complete ostracization.

To me, this mindset that there is an absolute binary for some things is very dangerous and unhelpful in our society. If any person says, “They support Trump/Clinton so they are evil/wrong/not worth talking to” then they just dehumanize a fellow human whose views may be complex and nuanced. Are they going to change their mind if they are cast out because of one thing?

If a politician says that they are pro-life/pro-choice are we better off if that is the ONLY issue that is important? That we view their morality, their character, their value by one hyphenated word instead of listening to them and trying to understand their point of view.

I think we need more nuance, more discussion, and more forgiveness. If someone is afraid that they are going to lose their family, lose their friends, lose their job, or anything else because they made one mistake or hold one contrarian point of view, what incentive do they have to come clean or to share their thoughts?

None of us can grow as people if we automatically decide one thing makes another person deeply flawed and unforgivable. Not only do we harm that person but we harm ourselves.

 

Wanna stay in touch? Got a question for me? Want to tell me why I’m wrong and are curious how I got everything so backward? Have an idea for a blog post? Drunk and wanna send me a Snapchat? Wanna become penpals and send each other letters in the mail?

Feel free to reach out at any of the ways below while I take a Facebook break!

Email address: pjneiger@gmail.com
Instagram: @peterneiger
Questions:  pneiger.sarahah.com or www.surveymonkey.com/r/XYRDXHH
Snapchat: @pneiger
Also, I wrote a book about a cross-country bicycle ride I did!
“Wandering Oak: A Rite of Passage”

Is Freedom An Intrinsic Good?

In college, I took a poli-sci class called “Utopia/Dystopia”. In it, we read Thomas More, Edward Bellamy, Ursula Le Guin, Octavia Butler, and many others. Included in our reading list “Brave New World” by Aldous Huxley. If you haven’t read or reread it recently I’d recommend it.

For those that don’t remember or haven’t read it, a major part of this dystopian(?) world is that humans are genetically engineered in artificial wombs and indoctrination programs. Before birth, each person has their job determined for them and they are genetically modified to enjoy that job. Adding to the pleasure of the world is the availability of soma, a drug that sounds a lot like MDMA. A happy world, but hardly a free one.

While discussing this book one of my classmates bravely spoke up and said, “I don’t think this is a bad place. Wouldn’t we all like to be happy and fulfilled? Who cares if the genetics were modified if we enjoy our lives?” At the time I kind of internally freaked out.

HOW COULD THIS PERSON SACRIFICE FREEDOM FOR COMFORT?

I didn’t actually say anything but I became pretty riled up. I was in the early stages of libertarianisms where I had read enough to feel like I was a contrarian but really didn’t have any philosophical foundation. I think what bothered me most about my classmate’s query  (and in some respects still does today) is that I don’t really have a good answer.

What they were really contesting was the idea that freedom is an intrinsic good. That even if the results of a free society cause pain, suffering, or whatever we should pursue it because it is good in and of itself.

To be honest, I don’t know if I believe that. I think it is possible, or even likely, that freedom is an effective tool to create a better world but in and of itself it has no value. A person on a deserted island is pretty free but that freedom isn’t necessarily good. It might not be bad and I think being free is generally better than being unfree, but that is because I think freedom brings about the best results for the most number of people.

Would I rather live in a less-free country if I had better access to healthcare and more time for leisure? Probably.

How much of my freedom I’d be willing to give up in exchange for a more secure and satisfying life is difficult to say. Measuring freedom is not objective and where I would be willing to, say, give up my freedom to own a rifle with a 200 round drum in exchange for a free gym membership, for others that rifle is very valuable. And I’m sure many people would give up their freedom to put MDMA in their body for a small price because that drug doesn’t have value to them, but it would be a very high price for me to give that up.

Regardless, just having freedom because it is good to have freedom doesn’t really play into life for me. So maybe my fellow student was right, maybe part of the world outlined in “Brave New World” is utopian. If I could lay down tonight, plug something into my brain, and wake up tomorrow and absolutely LOVE running then I would do that.

But would I do the same thing if I would wake up tomorrow and absolutely LOVE cleaning shit out of porta-potties? Right now I don’t think I would, but who knows? If it was the only way to feel a joyous and satisfying life and I would feel no discomfort or harm then maybe I would. Anything degrading about that work is a social construct and we should fight against such things.

Wanna stay in touch? Got a question for me? Want to tell me why I’m wrong and are curious how I got everything so backward? Have an idea for a blog post? Drunk and wanna send me a Snapchat? Wanna become penpals and send each other letters in the mail?

Feel free to reach out at any of the ways below while I take a Facebook break!

Email address: pjneiger@gmail.com
Instagram: @peterneiger
Questions:  pneiger.sarahah.com or www.surveymonkey.com/r/XYRDXHH
Snapchat: @pneiger
Also, I wrote a book about a cross-country bicycle ride I did!
“Wandering Oak: A Rite of Passage”

 

Finding a Word

Many (most?) of my identities are outside of the mainstream. I’m not exactly sure why that is or even how many different reasons contribute to it (though I have a few ideas). As is often the case, the “why” is not particularly relevant unless I thought these identities were problematic but I don’t. I no longer feel anxiety due to identifying as polyamorous, anarchist, apatheist, psychonaut, sexual fluid, etc.

But, that hasn’t always been the case.

There was a time when I felt completely lost and broken because I was different. I felt alone, I lacked community, I felt like the only one that saw the world the way I did. Luckily, in each case, I found a word, an identity, a flag that I can wave. Words have power, words give strength, words can unite people.

I’ll never forget how I felt when I came upon the word “polyamory”. Throughout my life I’d felt a certain discomfort with monogamy, it felt unnatural and as soon as I rejected my religious upbringing my practice of monogamy fell by the wayside. Being outside of monogamy was, ironically, lonely. I wasn’t someone who wanted just sex and I wasn’t someone that was willing to cheat. I wanted companionship, openness, and love… but serial monogamy seemed pretty terrible and I often wonder if we would have less serial monogamy if we had a culture that allowed polyamory.

So, throughout college, I practiced what I called “responsible non-monogamy”. I had three rules that guided my sexual and emotional interactions with people: I was upfront about not wanting monogamy, I always wore a condom, and I never hooked up with someone the first time if either of us were intoxicated. I wasn’t looking for fuck buddies, I wanted friendship, emotional connection, and sex.

And, you know what? It worked pretty well for me. I’m still friends with some of the women that I had this, what I now know of, polyamorous relationship with.

I was kind of concerned that when I left college things would change. Hookups are fairly common in college but as I moved to Washington DC and “the real world” I expected things to change, but it actually didn’t. I kept being honest and open about my views and I found many partners to connect with. Sure, sex was involved, but there was also going to movies, going on dates, cuddling, hanging out, and loving each other.

Still, I felt alone. There wasn’t a future for someone without an identity and I really didn’t feel like I had one.

Then, I stumbled upon the word polyamory on Tumblr and everything connected. By typing nine letters into the Google search bar I was produced with millions of pages that spoke to me and who I was. I found an online community that leads to real-life connections. I had a label, a word, something tangible to grab on to that helped me feel like I was a part of something bigger than myself… I had a community.

It was empowering and I’ll never forget it. There is strength in words and power when we can find a word of our own.

Wanna stay in touch? Got a question for me? Want to tell me why I’m wrong and are curious how I got everything so backward? Have an idea for a blog post? Drunk and wanna send me a Snapchat? Wanna become penpals and send each other letters in the mail?

Feel free to reach out at any of the ways below while I take a Facebook break!

Email address: pjneiger@gmail.com
Instagram: @peterneiger
Questions:  pneiger.sarahah.com or www.surveymonkey.com/r/XYRDXHH
Snapchat: @pneiger
Also, I wrote a book about a cross-country bicycle ride I did!
“Wandering Oak: A Rite of Passage”

Ars Moriendi

 “Technological society has forgotten what scholars call the ‘dying role’ and its importance to people as life approaches its end. People want to share memories, pass on wisdoms and keepsakes, settle relationshiops, establish their legacies, make peace with God, and ensure that those who are left behind will be okay. They want to end their stories on their own terms. This role is, observers argue, among life’s most important, for both the dying and those left behind. And if it is, the way we deny people this role, out of obtuseness and neglect, is cause for everlasting shame. Over and over, we in medicine inflict deep gouges at the end of people’s lives and then stand oblivious to the harm done.” – Atul Gawande, “Being Mortal”

I think most people would agree that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the general American culture approaches death. It may not be easy to put your finger on the exact issue but we can all feel it underneath the surface. We hide death and sometimes deny it exists. We bury our heads in the sand like children instead of recognizing a very simple truth: You will die.

Our medical system seeks to preserve life, no matter how much suffering is involved at all costs. Quantity rules the day and quality is irrelevant. Children lose their retirement and savings to keep an ailing parent alive but unconscious and attached to tubes for a few more weeks or months. We push the dying into hospitals and away from life and home. We hide them and come up with euphemisms that hide the truth: Your loved ones will die.

Money is funneled into funeral services and homes where chemicals are pumped into corpses to make them seem almost alive. We hide the dying process, the breakdown of our bodies, and the return of the elements that make us up to nature. All to avoid facing the uncomfortable truth: I will die.

This broken system wreaks our psyche. We are unprepared for reality when it strikes. We don’t talk to our aging family members about how they want their remaining days to play out, what they value, and at what point the suffering isn’t worth the longevity. We leave homes cluttered, money unspent, conflicts unresolved, and love unspoken because we always think there will be tomorrow. We go to great lengths to provide hope when we should be realistic. Then, when death comes we aren’t ready emotionally, physically, or economically. It always catches us by surprise even when the signs were there for months or years.

People are starting to seek out a better way. A way that recognizes there is more to life than living another day. Death is a natural process, not a medical one. As the natural process of life starts to get shorter it becomes increasingly important to prioritize the present, joy, happiness, satisfaction, love, experiences, and peace. Safety should not be prioritized. I think the grandpa in “Little Miss Sunshine” had it right:

  • Frank (to grandpa): You started snorting heroin?
  • Grandpa: I’m old! And don’t you start taking that shit. When you’re young, you’re crazy to do that stuff.
  • Frank: What about you?
  • Grandpa: What about me? I’m old! When you’re old you’re crazy not to do it.

But instead of embracing our immortality and recognizing that it is basically a blank check to make the most out of each day we pretend that it isn’t so. We don’t prepare ourselves or our loved ones. It is never too early to talk about these things and face mortality head-on. A young age is no excuse. People my age, people I have known, are dead already. Wealth, position, and age may be able to figure out an average age of death, but none of us are average. There is a possibility that you or I am near the end of the bell curve… maybe that means living to 100 but maybe that means dying this year.

It is best to be prepared and to look yourself in the mirror each morning and say:

“I am going to die. There is no changing that, but I get to decide if I am going to truly live.”

Wanna stay in touch? Got a question for me? Want to tell me why I’m wrong and are curious how I got everything so backward? Have an idea for a blog post? Drunk and wanna send me a Snapchat? Wanna become penpals and send each other letters in the mail?

Feel free to reach out at any of the ways below while I take a Facebook break!

Email address: pjneiger@gmail.com
Instagram: @peterneiger
Questions:  pneiger.sarahah.com or www.surveymonkey.com/r/XYRDXHH
Snapchat: @pneiger
Also, I wrote a book about a cross-country bicycle ride I did!
“Wandering Oak: A Rite of Passage”

Loyalty

Today, the 4th of July, I can’t help but think of some thoughts that swirled around my head while playing “Witcher 3: A Wild Hunt”. If you weren’t aware, “Witcher 3” is a piece of art disguised as a video game. I haven’t put in a ton of time into it yet but I am incredibly impressed by both the beauty of the world and the storytelling.

Throughout the game, your character encounters a lot of morally ambiguous situations. Your reaction to these situations can impact what you experience in the future and what happens to other characters. Take, for example, a relatively minor situation (excuse me if/when I get some of the details wrong but I think the general gist will be understood). Also, spoilers(ish).

Near the beginning of the game your character (Geralt) is in an area that was recently occupied by an invading army. Geralt has no dog in the fight, he is trying to accomplish something unrelated to the war and really doesn’t need/want to get involved. He soon encounters a leader of the invading army, who seems like a genuinely good guy. He is relatively generous with the peasants and doesn’t seem overly cruel, but he is still the leader of an invading army. So, do you work with him or not? Is there loyalty to him or his cause?

Another character is a freedom-fighter who is fighting the invading army, but his methods are less than ideal. He basically assassinates unarmed medics and such. Is he doing the right thing? Should you turn him in for murder, let him go, something else? Nearly every mission involves some sort of moral grey area. When do the means justify the ends? Do you require peasants to pay you for your monster-fighting services? If someone is suffering from a terminal poison do you let them die peacefully or administer an antidote that may not work and, if it doesn’t work, will make the person suffer until their last breath? When is your mission more important than the overall war or a thousand other things going on? There are rarely, if ever, a clear-cut right decision. And, as such, it is much like real life.

So, that’s the background. I always struggle with RPG’s like this because I want a clear-cut path. If I’m playing a “good guy” then I want a binary choice “kill innocent person or protect innocent person”. I find it difficult to make decisions as another character and instead end up responding how I would respond in real life (or, more accurately, how I would hope I would respond in real life). It is tough, mentally draining, and a beautiful piece of art.

The only time I can RPG in a way that makes the decisions easily is to prioritize loyalty. If I decide I am going to be loyal to Nilfgard then I do what I’m ordered to do or is best for Nilfgard. Loyalty (patriotism, nationalism) in it’s extreme form means forfeiting my own ability to judge morality and giving it over to others. Loyalty is the most cowardly of virtues, it rejects free-will and discomfort and tough choices. Loyalty is for children, not free-thinking adults (and it probably isn’t really for children either. It is the cause of many of the world’s evils. Wars require loyalty instead of thinking. Hatred requires the same.

So, as we sit here on the 4th of July I can’t help but wonder why loyalty has become such a cornerstone for some Americans. The Founders certainly weren’t loyal to an institution, but I guess they were to certain principles. But those principles were antithetical to loyalty. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness… these are pursuits that require one to say “I am going to live my life freely and using my own best judgment, and if you get in my way then I will overthrow you”.

Today may be a day of celebration (for some), but that celebration should not involve a pledge of loyalty or allegiance. It shouldn’t involve patriotism or nationalism. Today is supposed to be about casting off the chains of loyalty, of standing independent (as opposed to dependent), and saying “no, my government can be wrong, is wrong, and when it is wrong enough I will get rid of it. I have no duty to protect it.”

Wanna stay in touch? Got a question for me? Want to tell me why I’m wrong and are curious how I got everything so backward? Have an idea for a blog post? Drunk and wanna send me a Snapchat? Wanna become penpals and send each other letters in the mail?

Feel free to reach out at any of the ways below while I take a Facebook break!

Email address: pjneiger@gmail.com
Instagram: @peterneiger
Questions:  pneiger.sarahah.com or www.surveymonkey.com/r/XYRDXHH
Snapchat: @pneiger
Also, I wrote a book about a cross-country bicycle ride I did!
“Wandering Oak: A Rite of Passage”

The Most Important Questions

I ask a lot of questions, both of myself and others. I’m fascinated by the “why” of life. Why the universe works the way it does. Why people make the decisions they do. Why people have the views they do. I’m just really curious, particularly about people who live very different lives than I do. So, I ask questions.

Surprisingly, the two most impactful questions I’ve ever asked were not “why” questions. It is hard to decide which of these two questions has had the largest impact on my life. One of them has had a very tangible, direct impact on the direction of my life while the other is less tangible and more abstract.

The first question was asking my partner, “Do you want to go on a multi-year bicycle ride across the country with me?” She said yes without hesitation. She was willing to quit her good job and ride around with no guaranteed source of income or experience with bike touring. She was committed to not knowing where we would sleep at night, where we would get food or water, or where we would shower. It was at that moment that I knew I would propose and I knew she would say yes. Asking her to marry me was pretty much just a formality and didn’t really change anything.

The second question, the more abstract one, is constantly asking myself, “Are you sure this is true?”. More often than not the answer is “no”, and that is awesome. Not knowing has encouraged me to read more, experience more, and approach all institutions who claim a monopoly on truth with skepticism. My politics, veganism, spiritual views, sexuality, and a plethora of other things all come back to that foundational question, “Am I sure it is true?”

This question is where foundational principles help guide my life. (Am I sure those foundational principles are true? Nope.) By committing my life to harm reduction and peace then I come to the conclusion that veganism, drug legalization, libertarianism, etc. are the right views for me. I don’t know where I’d be without this question, I’d probably believe the same things that my parents believe, which would be a cause for concern because it likely means I didn’t question anything thoroughly.

Questions are the foundation of my life and many of them are unanswerable. But that’s okay. The unknown is what makes life beautiful and keeps my curiosity brewing.

Wanna stay in touch? Got a question for me? Want to tell me why I’m wrong and are curious how I got everything so backward? Have an idea for a blog post? Drunk and wanna send me a Snapchat? Wanna become penpals and send each other letters in the mail?

Feel free to reach out at any of the ways below while I take a Facebook break!

Email address: pjneiger@gmail.com
Instagram: @peterneiger
Questions:  pneiger.sarahah.com or www.surveymonkey.com/r/XYRDXHH
Snapchat: @pneiger
Also, I wrote a book about a cross-country bicycle ride I did!
“Wandering Oak: A Rite of Passage”

On Divorce

Divorce was basically a four-letter word in the home I grew up in. It was something that simply wasn’t done. When people got married it was a covenant with God and that shouldn’t/couldn’t be broken. It might be the most important decision a person could make, with maybe the exception of becoming a Christian in the first place. Ironically, despite the absolute and life-long importance of this decision, many people get married in their early 20’s when they have very limited life experience.

Think of it this way. For convenience sake, let’s say that adulthood starts at the age of 18. Realistically, the human brain (on average) isn’t done developing until the age of 25. In fact, the part of the brain that takes the longest to develop is the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that is of primary importance in making rational decisions, responding to situations with good judgment, and understanding long-term consequences. Also, adulthood isn’t binary, you aren’t either an adult or not an adult, it is more of a spectrum as our brains develop and we acquire life experiences.

Anyway, let’s go with 18 for the hell of it for adulthood and let’s say we will live to be 80 years old. The median age for a first marriage is 27.4 years for women and 29.5 years for men… let’s keep that at 28 years for convenience sake. Oddly, research shows that the best age to get married if you don’t want to divorce within the first five years is 28-32, so maybe this is a weird market equilibrium.

So, remembering that an average means that half the people are younger than 28 we are still gonna roll with that. These numbers mean that people are marrying after being an adult for 10 years and having a fully developed brain for 3 years, or 16% of their adult life and 5% of their fully developed brain life. That means they are committing to one person (unless they have a more relaxed view of divorce) while only experiencing a very small portion of their lives. To enter into that type of very important commitment without a way to change course when we each inevitably change seems foolish.

Sidenote: One of the most interesting concepts that is common throughout sci-fi is how relationships start to change with longeviety. In some sci-fi stories marriages are contracts that last a specific number of years and many relationships are considerably more open to new sexual and romantic partners. I just find that interesting and see value in our society moving in that direction. There would surely be fewer divorces if marriage expired and/or it was common to allow more diversity within the marriage.

Now, I’m not saying people shouldn’t get married young if they want to. Get married, have babies, do what makes you happy, but don’t put your head in the sand. Love feels awesome, each of us feels like a special flower immune to relationship-ending struggles or personal growth and changes that pull us apart. Life feels like a Disney movie when you are with someone you love, but that isn’t reality and we should face our future problems head-on, and that means talking about divorce in very real terms before marriage and throughout the marriage. Open, rational communication is key, particularly when it comes to important subjects like marriage, divorce, sex, finances, and all the troubles or desires that come with them.

What if one of you ends up $1,000,000 in debt? Talk about it before it happens.

What if one of you discovers that you have a major kink or are bisexual or fall in love with a co-worker? Talk about it before it happens.

What if one of you comes down with a gambling addiction? Talk about it before it happens.

What if one of you is in an accident and can’t work or walk or take care of themselves? Talk about it before it happens.

What happens if one of you is in a coma on life support indefinitely and will likely be brain dead for the rest of their life? Talk about it before it happens.

What if one of you no longer believes the religion that brought you together? Talk about it before it happens.

What is cheating specifically defined as (flirting, kissing, something else) and is it an extinction level event? Talk about before it happens.

And in what conditions would divorce be the best option? Talk about it before it happens.

Personally, I don’t think divorce should be viewed as negatively as it is. People can be great parents and friends while divorced. Removing the romantic and/or sexual component of a relationship can allow you to see the person more clearly and can strengthing the relationship while giving you both more freedom. Divorce can eliminate hostility and resentment, and it can save a friendship. I have several friends who have gotten divorced. The process varied from cordial to hostile but one thing they all have in common is that they are better off now than they were in the relationship. They are happier, have found new partners, and have been able to stay true to themselves instead of shaping themselves to appease someone else.

But, if someone has a religious or spiritual or ethical objection to divorce then they should be more cautious and take their time analyzing and possibly waiting longer before marriage. If, for example, when I took out a loan for my house I was told that I absolutely could not sell it or pay it off early, basically that I was going to live in this house for 30 years no matter what, then I probably would have been much more cautious about the purchase. It may take me many years to find a home and I may not ever find one that I agree upon. Even more so if the commitment was for life.

A life partner is MUCH more important than a house. I’m glad that there is a system in place for me to part ways with my house if we are no longer compatible, and the same is true for my partner. My partner and I have discussed many times, both before and since getting married, what would be a cause for divorce and how we would like to handle that. We are pragmatists, we realize that in the next 45 years (or 73% of our adult life) we are both going change and grow and that growth might not be in the same direction. What we want out of life and out of a partnership may change and we’d rather end things on good terms and remain friends, than force a relationship that is destined to make us unhappy. In the end, it comes down to the fact that we both love each other and want the other person to be as happy and fulfilled in this (probably) one life we get, even if that means it is without the other person.

Life is long and complicated. There is a crazy diverse amount of experiences that we can have in it. I certainly hope that I’ve found the partner that I will get to explore those things with. I want to climb mountains with her, build a home with her, have the flu with her, and grow old with her, but that may not happen, and that’s fine too. Because if we get divorced I know we will find someone else to spend some of our life with and we will be happy. Divorce is not a four-letter word and any of my friends who may go through it have my love and support, always.

Wanna stay in touch? Got a question for me? Want to tell me why I’m wrong and are curious how I got everything so backward? Have an idea for a blog post? Drunk and wanna send me a Snapchat? Wanna become penpals and send each other letters in the mail?

Feel free to reach out at any of the ways below while I take a Facebook break!

Email address: pjneiger@gmail.com
Instagram: @peterneiger
Questions:  pneiger.sarahah.com or www.surveymonkey.com/r/XYRDXHH
Snapchat: @pneiger
Also, I wrote a book about a cross-country bicycle ride I did!
“Wandering Oak: A Rite of Passage”