True.
Mo Fo stated: source post
If your sister cooked your cat, would you be butt hurt? ;)
More than butthurt, I'd be downright pissed off. But then again, if my sister was the sort of person to cook cats in microwaves, i wouldn't have any ties with her, blood-relation or not.
At least I can relate and agree with this. :)
ImNotHer stated: source post
I don't think trust is overrated. I think that people taking something that has depth and changing it to something shallow and meaningless, is just another defense against fear of being vulnerable or being seen as such.
Thank you for being more articulate than me. You've clearly expressed what I was flailing to get at.
I get what you mean, it’s just the dichotomy of “mundane†(‘shallow, meaningless’) vs “intimate†you presented i have issue with. Or maybe i’m just too old. Being a trader, i conduct mutually trust-based exchanges with total strangers all the time - if there’s a fuck-up in the system and i get screwed over, the real-life consequence will be a meltdown of much more palpable magnitude than any emotion-induced meltdown could be. Emotions after all are in my head and ultimately it’s my business to handle them at where they belong to - in my head. Which isn’t to say that i’m not sharing them, but foisting the meltdowns onto others under the pretext of ‘trust’ is overstepping a boundary.
That’s something i see every too often - people foisting their ‘trust’ onto unsuspecting others, as an uncalled-for requirement - exerting control over someone, or even a blackmailing tool.
Or maybe i'm just more financially vulnerable than emotionally.
Trust is a wonderful subject and I think it's important to understand what kind of trust we are speaking of. When you talk about not trusting someone to be a responsible person (to feed your cat) that just seems basic to me, and doesn't touch on the kind of trust that forms intimacy.
For instance, I can't trust any of my friends to carry out an important task as a favour to me, on time. They are all a bunch of procrastinating pathological slackers, and the possibility that an important step will get skipped is always high, because I learn and understand people through behavioural patterns. Yet, I would trust these same slackers with my feelings when vulnerable and heading for a meltdown. I know if I were to lose it completely and do something profoundly strange, something that others would ends up taking issue with, these same slackers would not judge or condemn me.
I don't think trust is overrated. I think that people taking something that has depth and changing it to something shallow and meaningless, is just another defense against fear of being vulnerable or being seen as such.
moonshine stated: source post
Well you stated this, as if it was some objective fact:
Mollie stated: source post
Trust, and lack of it, ultimately determines the depth of any relationship.
I do not think either (trust or the lack of) would ultimately determine the depth of any relationship. To a certain extent / various extents, no doubt it could. But ultimately?
OK, perhaps that's fair. "Ultimately" may be too definitive given we never defined the parameters of the discussion. I can downgrade to "generally'.
Mollie stated: source post
Being able to trust another or conversely having someone put their trust in you, is a rather big deal. Trust, and lack of it, ultimately determines the depth of any relationship. You said 'trust is over rated' and to me that implies that you do not understand the very basics of human relationships or how they are formed
"acknowledgement of the other's nature misnamed as trust"
I am not sure what you are trying to say. Acknowledgement (or maybe you mean 'accepting' another person's nature) does not equate to trust. I accept that some people are underhanded dirt bags and I deal with them accordingly because I do not trust them.
I like you.
Turncoat stated: source post
moonshine stated: source post
What i often see is "acknowledgement of the other's nature" misnamed as 'trust'.
This ought to be step one when it comes to trusting people... and it tends to be as far as I go.
Trusting someone implies belief that you know that someone, that you can predict what they will think, how they will feel, how they will act. So yeah, understanding someone's nature is important and a big first step. Sometimes though your "knowledge" is not complete or certain, and you go from trusting someone to having faith in them I guess.
moonshine stated: source post
I have multiple trust-based relations with people i do not even quite know let alone 'like', like the butcher / bank clerk / dentist / postman / & you name it. I trust them per default, and that mutual, impersonal, token trust is what keeps society's wheel running smoothly.
On the contrary, there are some people whom i dearly love and have deep human relationships with (my sister case in point), but wouldn't trust even with feeding my cat - i know them well enough not to trust them, yet they are the solid cornerstone of my world.
Then you get all those poor tossers who cry "butbutbut i trusted him/her/it!! And they screwed me over waaaaa!!!111!!"
Trust is grossly overrated. It became a by-word for wilful stupidity.
Would you call yourself trustworthy? Do other people usually trust you? Do you betray their trust or strive to live up to their expectations?