I'm surprised to see you say you've struggled with this concept, because I thought it was a point of agreement between you and I - between all the people closest to me. It's why people want me to be honest, why I want people to be honest with me - I don't need a blanket, I'm not trying to stay where I am. And if I come to you to use you as a blanket, it's worse than a waste of your time, it's an insult to both of us.
The part that hit me differently was the idea that if someone won't take something away, they couldn't actually give it. The only caveat I'd give (one of two, actually) is that trust, love, loyalty - they are not all or nothing. I love certain people in a certain way, in a barely-way, and I love you very differently. Trust you differently. I wouldn't my love is ever without conditions, but my time, attention and tolerance are all open questions.
2/2: I love my daughter unconditionally. But that's the reason she'll never be my "best friend," she'll never be anything but my daughter to me. I don't want anything from her, only want to give things to her. I might not extend trust, but my love, my tolerance, my loyalty - they're hers forever... I never thought about this, but it sort of limits the relationship because of that.
So, except for my daughter... I do not seek out or give unconditional love.
While not surprised about these concepts like angerie I can say at least that I've heard you speak of this before.
I understand the conundrum. What kind of solace can we find in love and trust when we 'know' it can be taken away? It's the kind of act that takes it away, that's the thing. A person worthy of trust is that way because they would *not* do anything to remove it. The issue is getting to know somebody... when you first meet them and have illusions about who they are (yours or theirs) then you are unable to give as much trust or love as you may be inclined to.
Benefit of the doubt is a good start. Doubt when it is proven necessary.
So much more that I want to write but my student is preflighting for our next flight and I have to get out there. More!
I'm surprised to see you say you've struggled with this concept
I've addressed almost every symptom of the concept, but lacked the concept itself until Tuesday night. Water is wet, wet, wet, but sometimes I've grown up believing otherwise - and faith of those early, ingrained principles can be hard to question or even identify.
I'd like to hear what brought this up.
I'll get back to you on this privately. It's a little too personal for the public part of my LJ. :>
It's simple-beautiful.
I'm surprised to see you say you've struggled with this concept, because I thought it was a point of agreement between you and I - between all the people closest to me. It's why people want me to be honest, why I want people to be honest with me - I don't need a blanket, I'm not trying to stay where I am. And if I come to you to use you as a blanket, it's worse than a waste of your time, it's an insult to both of us.
The part that hit me differently was the idea that if someone won't take something away, they couldn't actually give it. The only caveat I'd give (one of two, actually) is that trust, love, loyalty - they are not all or nothing. I love certain people in a certain way, in a barely-way, and I love you very differently. Trust you differently. I wouldn't my love is ever without conditions, but my time, attention and tolerance are all open questions.
2/2: I love my daughter unconditionally. But that's the reason she'll never be my "best friend," she'll never be anything but my daughter to me. I don't want anything from her, only want to give things to her. I might not extend trust, but my love, my tolerance, my loyalty - they're hers forever... I never thought about this, but it sort of limits the relationship because of that.
So, except for my daughter... I do not seek out or give unconditional love.
I'd like to hear what brought this up.
Reply
I understand the conundrum. What kind of solace can we find in love and trust when we 'know' it can be taken away? It's the kind of act that takes it away, that's the thing. A person worthy of trust is that way because they would *not* do anything to remove it. The issue is getting to know somebody... when you first meet them and have illusions about who they are (yours or theirs) then you are unable to give as much trust or love as you may be inclined to.
Benefit of the doubt is a good start. Doubt when it is proven necessary.
So much more that I want to write but my student is preflighting for our next flight and I have to get out there. More!
So glad you wrote this.
Reply
I've addressed almost every symptom of the concept, but lacked the concept itself until Tuesday night. Water is wet, wet, wet, but sometimes I've grown up believing otherwise - and faith of those early, ingrained principles can be hard to question or even identify.
I'd like to hear what brought this up.
I'll get back to you on this privately. It's a little too personal for the public part of my LJ. :>
Reply
Leave a comment