|
|
|
|
|
| The rules of engagement - willfully inelegant
Posted: 6/21/2008 2:45:29 AM |
Can you share an occasion where you selected to 'lose' the battle rather than lower your standards? or played fair in the face of opposition at personal cost? Doesn't this happen to everyone every day?
We make choices all the time to satisfy our desire to do what we believe to be good over our desire to gain materially. We choose not to steal, not to queue-jump, not to cheat or browbeat others. We give back change when the cashier miscalculates and gives us too much; we give to charity rather than putting the money back in our pockets; we take time out of our day to help another person by carrying something for them, opening a door, explaining how something works, giving directions - when we know we will never be materially compensated for our time or efforts. This is normality. This is the way humans prefer to act, the way we choose to act when we feel safe, secure, free, at peace...
It is when we feel threatened, fearful, insecure, confused and in turmoil that we become less free to choose the behaviours that reflect our best selves. Just as the tormented animal will lash out at anyone who approaches it, whatever their intent, so the tormented human is reduced to a state of defensive impulses. For many of us, we are most vulnerable to those who are dearest to our hearts, so we are more likely to be reduced to such a state in more intense relationships, especially in the majority of cases where people are not particularly good at coping with feelings of insecurity.
By the way the thing that sometimes surprises me in relationships that seem to degenerate to slanging matches, because of low values or due to to some other negative toxicity, sometimes seem to outlast the ones you think seem perfect (on the surface) where there are more well-mannered disagreements. In some cases this might be explained by the fact that the people who have "well-mannered disagreements" have little feeling for each other. In other cases it might be because with greater intimacy and familiarity comes a greater comfort with each other that means the couple who may appear to be at each others throats see something quite different from what onlookers see and they are secure enough in their relationship to express themselves this way. A final possibility is that your observation is biased by what is consistent with certain beliefs you hold. One common belief that people have is that a relationship without passionate arguments is an relationship without passion: many people *need* to have the fire of anger and conflict in their relationships and do not believe that any harmonious relationship can be as passionate as a tumultuous one. | |
|
| The rules of engagement - willfully inelegant
Posted: 6/21/2008 9:39:25 AM | Some nicely toned and very shrewd observations, Rune3, the two that stand out are that whilst if you have a sensible balanced approach you will automatically do 'the right thing', in your transactions with people and situations. Moreover to redress the karmic balance and harmony - sure you try to be fair.
I don't have biased opinions, consistent with self-deluding beliefs, I am a free-child, and like to pursue the thought constantly evolving the idea, like any scientific-styled mind, I am looking for answers, I am fascinated by the steps that are different and not what is normal for one culture, or group or class. Sure it is easier if you have a full belly to be more charitable, and I like your thought process when you clarify that it is when one is insecure that the tests and challenges are there to prove the self.
I also agree that a calm almost insipid relationship, where polite exchanges may in private turn into more dramatic ones.
I think that passionate, fiery relationships can work - they can be harmonious for those who they suit in temprement and style and can be exciting and even if they appear virulent to the unexposed types for whom these seem high drama, they are eventful. I was alluding to the kind of relationships where individuals seem to be perhaps so intense that they appear almost frozen. Beneath such surface stillness there can be a quake of volcanic emotion simmering. Sometimes, it may be quietly beautiful and surprising when it is expelled, other times it can be a simmering destructive force that is calculating and like sugared strychnine.
 | |
|
|
|
Home
login 