By Syed Ali Wasif
Philosophers and social scientists have tried to define human being. Definition, as we are told is known to captures the distinguishing essentials. Many definitions are current. ‘Man is a social animal.’; ‘Man is a rational animal.’; ‘Man is a thinking animal.’ etc. Great many definitions suggest one thing: none captures what man is in totality and reflects a specific frame of mind of the definer. Question is what motivates one to do ‘A’ and not ‘B’ at particular point of time and what is it that pushes him to go for ‘A’ rather than ‘B”. Human being is a highly complex thing, indeed. Man’s unfathomable complexity suggests highly complicated environment through which he has come through. Be that as it may, animals very rarely show animal-ness between themselves while man when in animal mood destroys the very fabric of social life of which he is said to be an animal.
From this general description of human behaviour, let us move to a more specific example; two colleagues, taking break in the lunch time, hand in hand together – no body should object – after all they are adults. However work place ethics demands certain restrains and boundaries. Just as it is unprofessional to meddle in other people’s affairs, so much so it is unacceptable to put a hand in some one else’s blouse – at least in public – without marital vows. But we are not talking about acceptable moral behavior for spouses, what we are acutely inflamed about is relationship at work place. Baring voyeurs’ and nymphomaniacs of certain type, every body would object to such behaviour.
Well there are allegiances and relationship that are fall out of normal human behavior. However, there are emotions which do not quite fit the bounds of aforementioned categories. What does one do in such circumstances?
A damsel of a co-worker comes in to your office, closes the door-shut, with a shallow breath and a husky voice, asks you to be more active in a discourse, involving mere letter to the vendors. After all one is also human, run by same hormones as Adam and Eve. It helps to keep a picture of your spouse, in circumstances like these. There are equally obnoxious bosses who insist on re-doing the letter, all the while gazing certain cleavage – literally reading between the lines. Then the third casualty is a by-stander; a colleague oblivious to the work-environment, engrossed in his work, incidentally opens the store room to find two co-workers (of opposite gender) engaged in a certain behaviour, which cannot be described in these lines, keeping in view the discretion required for young and tender minds.
A colleague of mine argues that this all important aspect of life is essential for optimum functioning at work. Off course, his actions, supplement the theory. I am not quite sure this is the way I would want to develop the focus of my work. I am quite content to live with the label of ‘sexually repressed’ rather then give in to hedonic impulses. Otherwise the unresolved Oedipus complex is also quite a heinous label to carry.
Logical next question is; what are the determinants of such behaviour? Some believe that such relationship gives them some sort of an advantage, over other colleagues or perhaps a job-surety of some sort. Some look to find solace, due to their unhappy home situation. A stale, untendered relationship at home gives way to such work place Romanticizing. Then there are those middle ages men and women, lacking wisdom, who are keen to seek assurance that despite passing years, sagging and wrinkled skin, they are still in demand. Some have no reason; they are just habitual offenders, looking to fill their spare time with some color(s). Anyways when the (work-place) honey moon ends, each end up complaining how they were cheated and tricked, knowingly well that they allowed this manipulation.
The central issue in this problem is personal and societal conflict around love. Love while considered as feeling appeals to every one; being in love with love rather then the person himself. When considered as a verb, it entails lot of thoughtful introspection. In former, one works to improve one’s social appeal; men aims to acquire money, fame and authority, while women work to improve their looks, dressing and social manners. While there may be no harm in pursuing these factors, problem lies when they become an end in themselves. If the focus changes from being loved to that of loving – of one’s capacity to love – then a state of maturity is attained from relatedness.
During my internship years, I remember a supervisor, notorious for his highhanded disciplinary attitude. He use to come down hard on any individual involved in ‘affairs’ other then work. He was particularly concerned about work place attitudes. His advice still echoes in my ear ‘You can take her out, that is not my concern, but the day I see any one of you, sitting around with any chick, that would be your last day’. I would object to his choice of words, but his advice was indeed helpful in shaping my relationships at work.
Organizations do intervene if this state of ‘affair’ goes out of hand. It begins to look at the performance and output indicators. After all this is a distraction, albeit whatever line of work you are in, from photography to practice of Medicine
0 Responses to “Workplace Romance!”