But am I really a Rebel?

In the Blog Trouble post, I noted that I was a firm Rebel according to the Rubin Tendencies. But then, I immediately doubted myself.

When it comes to rules, at least formal rules like laws, I am compelled to follow them. Feeling like I might not have, or that someone might THINK I didn’t, can cause me extreme anxiety.

In fact, what I’ve learned as I’ve gotten older is that I often BELIEVE that things are law when, in fact, they are subject to interpretation and/or negotiation. For example, deadlines, particularly at work. But also, rules about cancellation terms, bill amounts, coupon expirations, etc. There are so many small areas where “it doesn’t hurt to ask“ if you can have what you want instead of what the ”rules“ require— but it often never would have occurred to me to ask for an accommodation.

How do I make sense of this contradiction? That, generally, I push back against what people want from me UNLESS I believe there is an applicable rule, in which case I follow it perfectly?

I think it fits under the Rebel tendency to focus on acting in accordance with identity. I identify as a “good” person— one who acts morally and is an upstanding member of society. Pretty hard to be an upstanding member of society if you break a lot of laws, right? So then, if I perceive a rule or law, it is a requirement of my identity to comply with it.

Interestingly, speeding laws don’t seem to be “real” according to my identity…