PootieMandela Posted September 25, 2013 Posted September 25, 2013 So in the months since being cheated on and lied to (for the third time in my life) I've been doing plenty of thinking and reading. I want to pose a question to you fine folks, but first with a little more context. My mother has been tremendously supportive during this time for me. It has been especially hard but my focus has gone from self-pity to attempting to understand other people better. But I posed this question to her and received a response that was unintentionally profound. The question I asked was: Is it rational to assume that I cannot trust anybody to be completely honest with me? She used her own marriage as an example of how you can trust others for their honesty. Playing up the union as being blissfully pleasing. However, I stayed with them for a couple weeks during my transition after my breakup and about 3 days before I moved I overheard... not really an argument, but more of my mother screaming at my stepdad for pretty much nothing. Calling him stupid, accusing him of not being a "real man," telling him she's been faking happiness for years... all the kinds of stuff that would send me out the door without second thought. They had no idea I was in the house at the time. My mother is the person who I have turned to the most recently, and having her sugar-coat her marriage is a little unsettling. I can't really hold it against her seeing I was a teenager and lied to her more times than I could ever remember. But knowing what I do reaffirmed my thoughts on other's ability to be honest. What the significance of knowing my mother was intentionally dishonest to me is that it helped narrow down my understanding of relations we keep with others. I believe in every relationship we hold there will always be dishonesty. While we cannot control that, we find acceptable a certain level of dishonesty based on the other's intent, the amount of dishonesty we choose to use, or both. So now I ask you, users of the LoveShack forums: Is it rational to assume that anybody, no matter what relation, will never be completely honest with you?
AnyaNova Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 (edited) Okay. I think in intimate relationships, instead of thinking of the dishonesty/honesty dichotomy (not to say that dishonesty doesn't occur, and that it shouldn't be discouraged), it might be more helpful to view it from a Dietrich Bonhoeffer perspective, regarding the dance lovers play between exposure and hiding/shame. Depending on your mother's personality, she may say all kinds of stuff that isn't really true at all, in the heat of anger in the moment. They may, typically have a better marriage than that. But, as your mother, and depending on what your age is, can you blame her for wanting to shield you from the knowledge that a second marriage was in trouble, especially if her first marriage? broke up while you were a child, and caused you much distress? Until absolutely necessary? On the one hand, it is tempting for me to suggest that maybe there is not enough evidence yet to say that she was "sugar coating" or being dishonest. On the other hand, I also distinctly remember how I felt when my mother confided to me when I was about 21 that she hadn't actually waited until marriage. She never said she didn't, she simply did not discourage me from believing otherwise. So I can understand feeling lied to in this matter. But, to take this one thing, this one incident, and make a global reaching belief statement about all relationships? That is not only stretching logic hugely, but also doing yourself and your ability to trust in partners (albeit with some unfortunate past evidence not helping) a huge disservice. There is very likely a woman out there who will not cheat. Who will always do her best to be honest with you in every circumstance, and if for some reason she isn't able to be honest with you, will tell you as soon as possible, and explain why (adding this from an experience with my ex this summer, where his question actually caused a PTSD extreme fear reaction in me--not caused by anything in his demeanor or behavior, just my oversensitive brain-- that caused me to say that I hadn't done something that I had--not cheating, in case you are wondering--but, as soon as I got a chance when his stress level was low enough, I told him exactly what I had said, what had really happened, and why it happened). People often do save difficult to share material for later in the relationship. This is not being dishonest. This is being careful and protective with one's most precious commodity, the self. I guess, don't give up and take sham relationships, dishonesty, and surface dealings for true relationship. I hope you will work to find a true relationship. Edited September 26, 2013 by AnyaNova
Author PootieMandela Posted September 26, 2013 Author Posted September 26, 2013 I agree that omission for the sake of self-preservation has its place in the relations we keep. Just as my mother did not want to admit hardship in her marriage, I did not admit that I had witnessed her outburst. I was seeking guidance, not looking for a chance to embarrass her or question any validity to her opinions. Hell, I'm not even mad about it. Sure, its not truthful, but it's her illusion, not mine. As I said, its a dishonesty that is acceptable. I'm trying not to make sweeping generalizations due to isolated incidents. While the cheating girlfriend hurt, I see it as more now as a catalyst for these thoughts about the relationships we keep; intimate or otherwise. And dishonesty is fascinating to me. Obviously my friends don't need to know about the time I pissed myself in little league. This is, as you said, for the sake of self-preservation. But where is the line we draw? What do we find acceptable to omit or alter? When does self-preservation turn into deceit? How do these decisions differ in varying relationships? (Thank you for your insight)
AnyaNova Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 I will have to think a lot more about those questions and get back to you. But in the meantime. I am very curious. Is it solely that you are thinking about this in light of others and their honesty towards you? Or is there something (not that you need to go into it if you do not wish to) that you have not shared in a recent relationship that you fear could verge on dishonesty, and whether or not a solid relationship can be had without the sharing? Why is this weighing so heavily on you now?
Author PootieMandela Posted September 26, 2013 Author Posted September 26, 2013 I've been reading a lot of books on ethics (Critique of Judgement by Immanuel Kant, Truth and Subjectivity by Michel Foucault, etc.) so keeping in mind the histories and opinions expressed and dissected I try and find applicable outlets in my life, so my recent and past relationships are easy to draw upon. And yes, this includes myself. I've never cheated on my SO, but I sure have kept plenty... "hidden" for lack of better words. For example, I experienced an extended period of physical and emotional abuse as a child. In my last relationship I never let the conversation go much further past that detail. But the focus of the questions I pose is not "Will I be able to trust a girlfriend again?" Because I know the answer is a resounding yes. The insight I seek is more along the lines of "What is the reasonable expectation of trust we should seek with eachother, given the subjective nature of dishonesty?"
AnyaNova Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 refreshing. An intellectual exercise, rather than an emotional or exploratory one dealing with one's past relationships. Again, I need more time to think about these questions. I must admit to not having read much Kant, or the books you discuss. And as I am in graduate school (when I'm not stuck home sick) I probably will not have time to read them just now, so feel free throughout whatever discussion ensues to elaborate on their contents.
Author PootieMandela Posted September 26, 2013 Author Posted September 26, 2013 Well the books themselves have little to do with emotional relationships. Critique of Judgement is more about the connection between morality and aesthetic in art and the observation thereof. Foucault touches on topics such as infidelity and the origins of its position of being unethical. As well as early psychiatry, criminal justice, the demonization of homosexuality, etc and the histories and ethical conundrums faced within. Certainly gets the gears turning.
keepontruckin Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 Is it rational to assume that anybody, no matter what relation, will never be completely honest with you? I think it is rational to assume that the possibility is always there. I mean, even your best bud may lie if he's screwing your GF... People are self serving creatures, just like the animal world in general... We do what we have to do to survive, even if that means lying. Now, I'm speaking generally in terms... Some people will not lie, even if it gets them 20 years in prison. Integrity? Not sure... Either way, most people are OK, but always look out for yourself...
Recommended Posts