I always wonder how different I would be had I grown up with a sister rather than just the two brothers.
Don’t get me wrong - I love my brothers. And I also quite like them. (The two are not always mutually inclusive). For sure, I have issues with them both and no doubt they have legion complaints about me (with their complaints being listed in colour coded columns, with dates, times and various appendices explaining who else was in the room and who else was offended/upset/disgusted by my behaviour).
Tuesday is International Siblings Day, a day where we are exhorted to celebrate all that is great and good about our brothers and/or sisters. Of all the days that are crafted by the free market capitalists, this surely has to be the most potentially divisive. We have Mother’s and Father’s day - obviously there are folk who hate their parents but there is still, if not an emotional, a legal link with your maw and paw.
On becoming grandparents so many hatchets are buried and broken bonds renewed and repaired. Where there’s a will there’s a way; or, as I prefer to say, where there’s a will there’s a bunch of greedy children waiting tae see who got what. Parents and children will always have that figurative umbilical cord.
But there is no such link with siblings. I have friends who hate their siblings more than can be expressed in words; it’s a unique hatred, a hatred reserved solely for those that made one’s life a living, daily hell for the better part of two decades and beyond. I know of one pair of brothers who have to have their Christmas visits to their beloved mum in Renfrew timetabled so that neither of them are together in the same room in the presence of cutlery. Seriously. Social Services will intervene if there is some to-do between a parent and a child; but I don't think I have heard of such an intervention in the case of a sibling.
Luckily I had no such internecine issues with my big and wee brother. Our disputations were altogether more low key in their occurrence and intensity. There was never and will never be the compulsion to remove the silver service should more than one of the Kohli sons be in the same room at the same time.There was of course the controversial “Baw-gate” in 1978 when my older brother thought the best way to get me to be better at football was to place his foot (at high speed) into my “baws”. I lay in the middle of the pitch for a good half hour as he and my cousins played around me. But boys will be boys.
But as I grow older, and watch my daughter blossom into the early throes of womanhood, I cannae help but wonder what it would have been like to have had an ever present female in my formative years. Would I have been any better informed about the ways and wiles of woman? Would the testosterone tension of my childhood have been at all softened and eased by an input of oestrogen? Would the dynamic of the 'Three Musketeers' have been much changed by 'Two Musketeers' and a girl? How would we, with our two cousins (also brothers) have formed a ready to play five-a-side team? And would I have had more luck when it comes to the ladies?
Such thoughts and dalliances are absolutely academic. I have what I have; two, decent, very successful brothers. They are two very different people and for all these years I always thought that I was the shuttle between them; but now I have realised that we are three islands. While the distance between us on our archipelago of affection may not be the hop, skip and jump we once hoped it might be, we are brothers. And though maybe we need a ferry rather than a rowing boat to visit each other’s hinterland, I am certain that in the stormiest of storms they will both always offer safe harbour.
As is expected in a man closer to the end than the beginning, I look down at my own progeny with pride. They have a beautiful relationship; neither is an island to the other. They are land-locked in their love.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here