Denial

Alluveal · Post by **Alluveal** » Thu Mar 19, 2009 1:28 pm

Harlowe wrote:Turn that around, you mean a vow of fidelity to someone else only means something when it's convenient and easy? When life gets hard it's okay to overlook that "spiritual" or "sacred" vow of fidelity? Personally, I don't consider infidelity "life getting hard". I think that's utter bullshit if a cheater uses that as something to hold over the other person's head "but honey, you said better or worse, this is just the worse part". I am pretty sure that the majority of people going into a marriage aren't vowing to stay with someone through infidelity. "LIfe getting hard" to me (and I believe I am not alone in this) would be financial, medical, emotional, family or relationship issues that do not cross the line into cheating or abuse.

That's hardly giving up when it's inconvenient.

And again, if a person's spiritual or sacred vows meant anything, they wouldn't do it to begin with. They wouldn't cheat when things got hard. That's a weak excuse imo.

I have to agree here. If someone cheats, imho, and they've made spiritual vows, then I'm going to question whether or not they're genuine enough with their own spirituality to give a crap if they cheat or not.

Freecare Spiritwise · Post by **Freecare Spiritwise** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:31 am

Been rolling this around for a couple days. I've always followed a simple formula for trust, which has worked well for me, and I'm guessing it's a common formula.

1. Once I trust someone, it's absolute until they give me a reason not to trust them.

2. If there's a trust issue, I weigh the level of indescretion versus someone's track record, if any.

So:

small issue + long track record = I probably let it slide. They'll get an earful and that's about it.
big issue + anything but a long track record = bye bye
big issue + long track record = situational, and what most people seem to struggle with.

10 years of marriage and in all honesty we'd probably rate each other with a solid B grade as far as trust goes. She's got her mother's secret shopping spree behavior and I've got my dad's flirtatious behavior. But we're 100% open with each other, and we see our destructive impulses for what they are, and deal with them directly. But somehow it works, and there's not an ounce of denial. I've never fucked another woman (unlike my dad) and she's never hit Submit on at $10,000 Amazon order (unlike her mom). And there's spies in the kingdom to keep us honest. Heh, the 19 year old is a double agent. Just in the last day she ratted the wife out for a secret don't-tell-my-husband bag of shopping goodies in the trunk and the wife heard the story about me flirting with the girl taking my measurements for a tux at the Men's Warehouse. Trust but verify?

Oh, and a quote that I've always liked:

"The best way to make a man trustworthy is to trust him" ~ Will Rogers (?)

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:35 am

1. Once I trust someone, it's absolute until they give me a reason not to trust them.

2. If there's a trust issue, I weigh the level of indescretion versus someone's track record, if any.

I think this the same formula most sensible, emotionally mature people use...that is ones without deep-seated trust issues.

Taxious · Post by **Taxious** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:42 am

Embar Angylwrath wrote:@ Klast
Nope, I won't elaborate. One person on this board knows the story, and that's enough.

Hrm.... how is Fingle doing anyway? I haven't seen him in a while.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:58 am

Interestingly enough, he called me the other day. I owe him a return call. But he's not the person I'm referring to.

Taxious · Post by **Taxious** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:01 am

Embar Angylwrath wrote:Interestingly enough, he called me the other day. I owe him a return call. But he's not the person I'm referring to.

oic.

When you talk to him, tell him to come back to brants and do more fingle movie reviews. Those were always fun to read.

Freecare Spiritwise · Post by **Freecare Spiritwise** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:56 pm

Harlowe wrote:
1. Once I trust someone, it's absolute until they give me a reason not to trust them.

2. If there's a trust issue, I weigh the level of indescretion versus someone's track record, if any.
I think this the same formula most sensible, emotionally mature people use...that is ones without deep-seated trust issues.

Heh, people accuse me of being too trusting, but AFAIC it's a proven formula. The Will Rogers quote is true - most times people will rise to the level of trust you place in them.

Klast Brell · Post by **Klast Brell** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 7:29 am

It's easy to gain my trust.
It's hard to regain it.

Freecare Spiritwise · Post by **Freecare Spiritwise** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:56 pm

An observation on human nature:

The person prattling on and on about a certain virtue is usally the one most lacking (ultimately) in that same virtue. Some of the most dishonest and dishonorable people I've ever met were self appointed moral police for those same virtues.

Select · Post by **Select** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 4:54 pm

Maybe it's because I'm young and haven't met as many, but the biggest police I've met were those most hurt by people lacking that virtue.

Alluveal · Post by **Alluveal** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:39 pm

I think there is truth in what Free and Select said.

But, I also think that people can (every now and then,) just be sanctimonious little bitches. I know I've done that a few times in the past w/o any real personal attachment to an issue or cause.

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:09 am

Freecare Spiritwise wrote:An observation on human nature:

Some of the most dishonest and dishonorable people I've ever met were self appointed moral police for those same virtues.

I see that play out mostly with those claiming to be Mega-good Christian god fearin' folk.

Ariannda Kusanagi · Post by **Ariannda Kusanagi** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:28 am

Harlowe wrote:
Freecare Spiritwise wrote:An observation on human nature:

Some of the most dishonest and dishonorable people I've ever met were self appointed moral police for those same virtues.
I see that play out mostly with those claiming to be Mega-good Christian god fearin' folk.

I had an encounter with a woman like that, she was doing Gods will and caring for dogs and adopting them out for nothing (next to nothing tbh) but she came to my door 2 days later, crying, pushing me when i was 36 weeks pregnant to get into my house and grab the dog and carry her out of the house claiming she needed the dog back and there wasn't anything i could do about it. I never did figure out what exactly turned her into a psycho raving lunatic, but she had the crazy eyes, and the way she went on and on about her burden and Gods will I should have known something was going to happen. She wasn't dishonest exactly, but I pressed assault charges on her (turns out i should have pressed burglary charges, as those would have been upheld, as she admitted to pushing open my door herself) but the DA told me they'd had more then one case involving her before, taking dogs out of peoples yards she felt weren't being treated right, and taking it upon herself to commit some other dubious acts.

Post by **Ddrak** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 4:05 am

Harlowe wrote:I see that play out mostly with those claiming to be Mega-good Christian god fearin' folk.

It's called an authoritarian personality.

Dd

Brell Rants

Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial

Re: Denial