We lack a desire to hurt one another until generally motivated by some perceived slight or a strong enough desire to achieve or acquire something else. Our instinct holds us in place, preventing us from hurting one of our own species, especially someone from our own “pack” or family. Yet, when we feel comfortable enough with the people around us, we relieve our venom onto them because we know they will not abandon us. We take this dark action toward our loved ones because we fear Abandonment and Rejection. I write them with capital letters at the beginnings because they are our great evils; the human existence is beholden to a base question, “Are you there for me?” This whole matter is a constant source of upset for me on multiple levels, a surprising complex of contradictions, and at heart, prevents us from being honest and able to handle honesty.<\/p>\n
The amygdala is an actual part of the brain that essentially constantly asks “are you there for me?” It is a mammalian group of nuclei; a thing in the brain evolved to make us rely on one another for the better survival of the species. How many times have I bitterly wished this was not the case… It creates fear of rejection, the ultimate enemy of mammals everywhere, and even the slightest hint of rejection from our parents at youth can spoil us; make us rotten and ruined. I first really learned about it in a relationship counseling class I took. I was not in a relationship at the time, but because I felt I had made too many mistakes in previous relationships, and wanted to prevent these mistakes from happening again, I took this course to better myself.<\/p>\n
Among the things discussed in the class, insecurity was a great focus. Insecurity of self stems from insecurity with parents and people close to us. We are intrinsically tied to others. Our ego, no matter how much we indulge it, therefore, is not simply our own.\u00a0 I learned about several “dances” that couples perform psychologically. For instance, Mary asks John to do the dishes, and John says yes, but does not do them. Hours go by and Mary eventually confronts her husband about this. She is angry at him, and yells at him about the dishes. John in response to her yelling, remains quiet, and when the argument is over he simply goes out for a while. Mary feels completely ignored by his lack of communication. She feels John doesn’t want to talk with her or care for her. John feels similarly; that Mary hates him so she yells at him, but he actually does care and he’s hurt, so he’s gone away to go lick his wounds. When Mary is asking John to do the dishes, she’s actually asking him “are you there for me?” When John goes out for a while and remains calm, it’s because he’s afraid to get upset at Mary and hurt her emotionally, so he retreats until he calms down, but to Mary this means “No, I’m not there for you.” Likewise Mary yelling at John means to him, that she is not there for him either. It may seem silly, but this is the source of most arguments in a relationship. To cope, this couple may begin to lie to each other to prevent further upsets, rather than engage in healthy and necessary introspection, as well as healthy confrontation.<\/p>\n
The ego is such a fragile thing, and it makes us humans afraid to be honest with one another. We are afraid to damage someone else’s ego, mayhaps as much as we are afraid to have our own damaged. Consider this: A man is flirting, or attempting to flirt, with a woman. It starts out friendly, and she is unaware of the flirting until talking to him for about thirty seconds. She is made uncomfortable by the process, but rather than simply say she’s taken or that she is uncomfortable, or not interested, she instead keeps talking with him and throwing hints at him. These hints are designed to indicate disinterest, and may even be considered normal everyday hints that people should pick up on. The man, clueless, continues to flirt. She’s still talking to him and he takes this as a good sign. Innocently, he pushes forward, eventually getting to the point where he asks her if she’s single. She smiles wryly and shows him her ring. She’s engaged, then her fiance shows up, and the fiance happens to be an acquaintance of his. The man laughs about it, thinking the whole thing is funny, and he’s a little nervous too, so he apologizes. The couple acts like there’s nothing wrong, and thinking everything is okay, the man simply abandons the flirtation and acts politely towards them, not that he really wasn’t being polite in the first place.<\/p>\n
Months later, the man finds out from someone that the woman he was flirting with complained about him. The man, seeing her fiance, attempts healthy confrontation. “Excuse me,” he says, “but I found out from someone that your fiance complained about me. I wasn’t given her name, but since she was the only one I hit on I know it must be her.” The fiance says “Yes, she was giving you all these hints. “You should’ve stopped.” The fiance further states that the place where the man was hitting on his fiance was not an appropriate place to hit on someone. Bear in mind, that the flirting occurred at a recreational event.<\/p>\n
The man sees only conflict if he continues arguing his point. If “it is not a place to hit on people,” then no place is. People are at a bar to drink, not be hit on. People are on a subway, not to be hit on. People are at a club to dance, not be hit on. The list goes on indefinitely. The logic is disturbingly incorrect. The whole thing is a mess.<\/p>\n
Healthy confrontation would involve the woman in the scenario firmly stating that she is not interested. If the man persisted beyond that, then he would be at fault; however, not being able to recognize “hints,” while being a personal flaw of his, does not actually make him wrong in the situation. No means no, and this is true, but using hints when what is intended to be said is “no,” is going to lead to confusion. This experience was a personal one, and I continue to feel frustration at this issue to this day.<\/p>\n
There is not only a disturbing lack of empathy in this country, but a vast inability to communicate directly with or without fear of hurting someone’s feelings. The backwards actions can lead to drama and serious repercussions, when all that could’ve been said, all that should’ve been said, in any situation, was the truth. A person is not responsible for someone else’s inability to handle the truth, only for their own expression of the truth. To assume such a responsibility, is to consider the other person a child; a being incapable of being responsible for their thoughts, emotions, and self. It is a great insult. Furthermore, to then complain about a “child” that a person assumed such responsibility for, is tantamount to a parent complaining to someone uninvolved in the situation about their child, and expecting them to take responsibility. The shirking of responsibility, the response to perceive threats of the ego, and the lack of recognition of our responsibility for our own communication combine to create a dangerous ocean of treachery. We are all sharks swimming in our collective waters.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
We lack a desire to hurt one another until generally motivated by some perceived slight or a strong enough desire to achieve or acquire something else. Our instinct holds us in place, preventing us from hurting one of our own species, especially someone from our own “pack” or family. Yet, when we feel comfortable enough […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-674","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-fall13"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=674"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":877,"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674\/revisions\/877"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=674"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=674"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.meadmedia.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=674"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}