Writer's Block

[fajrdrako]

[Error: unknown template qotd]

Honesty and kindness. I can't think which is more important.

Comments

[xinef.livejournal.com]

I can't narrow it down to one. I listed 5 qualities, which I think are absolutely essential to me in a significant other. YMMV!
http://xinef.livejournal.com/340735.html

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

at the moment I am inclined writing "being Peter"

honesty and kindness are immensely important, but so are many other things. I once said I wanted someone to both protect me as stimulate me (stimulate in the sense of encourage to explore the world outdoors). I would still say so, but to say that is the most important I don't know.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

It's hard to bring it down to one thing.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

I agree with that. And I have been working on both of these, myself, because I do believe they are both so deeply important in a well-lived life connected to another well-lived life. As for myself: I would add dependability. It is not much good if one knows one's S.O. is honest, if one also knows that the S.O. will be honest about bailing out on you when you come in needing to have a long cuddle with no words and no interfering sexplay after you've had a horrendous day...!

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I would value dependability but I'm not sure it's possible for anyone to achieve. By which I mean: people change, ideas change, needs change, and sometimes people can't keep their promises or follow through on their intentions. My approach has been to learn not to need, or expect, or (heh) depend on dependability.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

And I would say that that is a flaw you have.

I can't not need dependability. All I've been able to do, in my adult life, is make sure I can cope when it deserts me. I still need it. And I still try to provide it. I think kindness is a lie if it is not linked directly to the good intention of trying to maintain dependability. And, really, isn't that a small thing? Just ... try. I'm not asking for super-human ability to conquer circumstances; I just need good intentions, and will forgive every shortcoming. Every.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Good intentions are easy. Living up to them is possible. But everyone's fallible and I try not to judge people for it.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

Agreed. I know that people are fallible (heaven knows I am myself). I respect anyone who has an awareness of their own limits -- honestly, I do. But I was trying to say that avoiding the full extent of emotional interaction because of a desire not to have someone else get into the habit of expecting something from you was not something that I could fully respect. Interesting, too, that I write this about five hours after I totally screwed up something that three other people were expecting me to do competently, and now I have one of the three very upset with me, and I'm not sure how it will all turn out. We had a training seminar scheduled for early next month, and one steward and one prospective steward were interested in attending, but due to communications failure no one is now going, because -- let me see -- okay: the steward thought she only had to notify me, the secretary, which she did; I misunderstood, when I found her registration paper in my office mailbox, and thought the president had put it there; she had to first notify the president that she was interested, and she never did that; if the president had known that the two of them were interested, both he and another steward also would have made the date available and gone too. So, today, it all fell down in an untidy pile. The steward is in a huff because she thinks that I was dishonest with her, when actually she didn't follow the proper channel for notifying the president first, but she was for some reason under the impression that she only had to tell me and that I'd then tell him. So, even though it is not my fault, it still is. I've been an officer longer than she has been a steward, and I should have realized that she might not know the chain of communication. Which, after this, she now will, of course. But that's assuming she isn't upset enough with the situation to quit as steward. I won't know till more time passes. Feels codependent, yeah. But even though I'm not directly responsible, I was still mostly responsible. Maybe only because she relied on me to be doing my part of it right, and I missed seeing that she was out of sync with the communications network.

Codependent is not helpful, but being able to let someone lean on you when they need it... is. And being able to tell them you can't do that for them... also is. Speaking of personal relationships again, I am. And, really, I'm working this through for the first time, y'know? At this point in life, I am getting out from under the "overlay" of all that internalized do-it-this-way junk that the helpful neurotypicals in my life kept showering me with, and basically I'm seeing and understanding (and attempting) a great deal of this stuff pretty much as if for the first time, these days. Thinking of how people who take the 12 steps to beat their various addictions talk about how scary it is to have "sober sex" again, or to do this or that or the other thing "sober" for the first time. Now I understand. I do things now, and am fully, safely, normally (for me) aware of them basically for the very first time... which honestly I find pretty damn fascinating [g]. But it'd probably freak out the people around me, so I haven't talked about it except this one time!

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I'm not advocating avoiding 'the full extent of emotional interaction'. I'm simply avoiding judging people on my own hopes and expectations, or expecting them to match my needs. They won't, but that's okay. We all do our best to do our best as situations arise.

I'm trying to avoid the "do it this way junk", too.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

I am now confused.

Is it that unreachable a thing to mutually expect to be able to rely on a small number of close people to catch you when you need it, and to know that you will do the same for them -- if any of you find it possible? And not to judge anyone for not being able to?

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

No, it's not unreachable. I'm not even sure what you're asking here. There's no rule you have to do it all a certain way.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

The meanings got lost in the wordings. Never mind, eh?