"What do you mean when you say you trust someone?" That I am *reasonably* sure that they will not kill me. And sometimes that I think they do not mean me intentional harm. Everything else needs to be qualified. Just the way it is.
I don't know if it's cynical. I have taken damage and healing. I just know I have gotten snagged in similar questions.
I believe that we can trust others to the extent that we trust ourselves: to first receive, then discern and sometimes withstand the impact of their action upon us. I also wonder if that makes me a cynic. It's an old belief, early twenties, maybe. But it still rings true for me.
YES! Trusting one's self is intimately connected to trusting others. I've been really exploring the self-trust thing lately as it relates to intention. Like, noticing my intentions, and then noticing when my behavior is motivated by my intentions, and what conditions help or hinder keeping with my intentions. Trying not to abandon myself in the process, to stay present and honest and caring with myself through what is actually happening.
Yeah, Still a sore subject with me. I've been struggling with this concept for a couple of years, now, after a huge betrayal by someone who demanded that kind of blanket trust as evidence of commitment to the relationship (and then of course betrayed it).
I like your definition, and also untrique's. Finding ways to be in relationship with people without opening yourself up for unecessary damage is one of life's challenges. We all bring so much baggage to relationship that expecting not to be betrayed, one way or another, is unrealistic.
However, I no long question whether I'm a cynic - just whether I"m truly a misanthrope.
Wow, bunnybutt. Someone "demanding trust" just seems oxymoronic. How painful and difficult that sounds.
And betrayal -- I keep thinking that if we truly see people clearly, they can't actually betray us. How much of that blanket kind of trust is about romanticizing people, rather than accepting the truth of them?
My particular struggle is about discernment - I have tended to take people at their word, which I am realizing is unrealistic for a whole host of reasons. First, it makes me an easy target for deliberate manipulators, but second, and more problematic, it means I'm not taking into account the incredible complexity of the speaker's history/viewpoint and relationship with themselves. (e.g., when per demanded that level of trust, I simply strove to give it rather than critically question what internal dynamic might have provoked the request, and whether anyone who asked for that could actually be worthy of it).
I'm old to be coming around to the realization that "in order to love others, you must first love yourself" cliche, but that seems to be at the heart of this question. So much work to do on trusting myself, rather than anyone outside myself, first and foremost.
I don't think you're old to be coming to new realizations about how self-love fits into the picture. Think of how many people never do it at all.
For me, it's just layer after layer of new understandings about self and other and how those things fit. I'm starting to feel like they're not so different at all, really, in the sense that we are ALL interconnected, omitting none. And I've noticed that being kind to myself translates naturally into being kind to others. How I treat others is almost always a reflection of how I am treating myself. Sometimes it's too subtle to see it initially, but I struggle to think of an instance in which it's not true.
When I say I trust someone, I mean that I expect them not to try to intentionally harm me for the sake of it, and to attempt to minimize harm when it's unavoidable for other reasons.
And, as it happens, it turns out I trust a lot of people that way. Sometimes without merit, but not often.
I also expect people to change. To hurt me. To pursue their own agendas. None of that interferes with my trust.
a friend married a wonderful woman who said "trust is actions over time." she says that it builds up like layers of pearl in an oyster. i liked this description alot
( ... )
The "trust is actions over time" thing still feels fragile to me, because it feels like it's about building an attachment to someone not changing. To me, actions over time will predict what someone is *likely* to do in the future, but circumstances and people change in ways that will surprise us for better or worse, and I want to keep allowing for that inevitability. This feels to me like increased trust in the world, in true nature.
I'm interested that you have brought "discarding humanity" into the conversation. What is it to discard humanity? Is it to imagine someone as beyond forgiveness?
i think that "actions over time" are about seeing if someone can maintain their kindness and equanimity in many different situations. will you keep on paying attention to how you treat me, can i rely on you to show up for me when that's needed? even if you are changing and growing, how you are treating me is a set of choices you make. love is a verb.
discarding humanity is indeed about reaching a place perhaps beyond forgiveness, beyond healing or rehabilitation, beyond the ability to make ammends. does evil exist? i don't know for sure, but serial murderers and war mongers have made me wonder. how do we explain Hitler, Idi Amin, genocide in general?
what i do believe is that i damage my own humanity when i set out to damage another intentionally.
Since when is not trusting someone to be equated with discarding their humanity? Trust is about discernment. Humanity is inate. You don't have to trust someone to acknowledge their humanity or even be moved greatly by it.
Comments 53
That I am *reasonably* sure that they will not kill me. And sometimes that I think they do not mean me intentional harm. Everything else needs to be qualified. Just the way it is.
I don't know if it's cynical. I have taken damage and healing. I just know I have gotten snagged in similar questions.
Reply
Hey, with that definition, I actually trust lots of people!
Reply
Reply
Reply
I like your definition, and also untrique's. Finding ways to be in relationship with people without opening yourself up for unecessary damage is one of life's challenges. We all bring so much baggage to relationship that expecting not to be betrayed, one way or another, is unrealistic.
However, I no long question whether I'm a cynic - just whether I"m truly a misanthrope.
Reply
And betrayal -- I keep thinking that if we truly see people clearly, they can't actually betray us. How much of that blanket kind of trust is about romanticizing people, rather than accepting the truth of them?
Reply
My particular struggle is about discernment - I have tended to take people at their word, which I am realizing is unrealistic for a whole host of reasons. First, it makes me an easy target for deliberate manipulators, but second, and more problematic, it means I'm not taking into account the incredible complexity of the speaker's history/viewpoint and relationship with themselves. (e.g., when per demanded that level of trust, I simply strove to give it rather than critically question what internal dynamic might have provoked the request, and whether anyone who asked for that could actually be worthy of it).
I'm old to be coming around to the realization that "in order to love others, you must first love yourself" cliche, but that seems to be at the heart of this question. So much work to do on trusting myself, rather than anyone outside myself, first and foremost.
Reply
For me, it's just layer after layer of new understandings about self and other and how those things fit. I'm starting to feel like they're not so different at all, really, in the sense that we are ALL interconnected, omitting none. And I've noticed that being kind to myself translates naturally into being kind to others. How I treat others is almost always a reflection of how I am treating myself. Sometimes it's too subtle to see it initially, but I struggle to think of an instance in which it's not true.
Reply
And, as it happens, it turns out I trust a lot of people that way. Sometimes without merit, but not often.
I also expect people to change. To hurt me. To pursue their own agendas. None of that interferes with my trust.
Reply
Reply
Reply
The "trust is actions over time" thing still feels fragile to me, because it feels like it's about building an attachment to someone not changing. To me, actions over time will predict what someone is *likely* to do in the future, but circumstances and people change in ways that will surprise us for better or worse, and I want to keep allowing for that inevitability. This feels to me like increased trust in the world, in true nature.
I'm interested that you have brought "discarding humanity" into the conversation. What is it to discard humanity? Is it to imagine someone as beyond forgiveness?
Trusting one's self. Yes. Yes Yes Yes.
Reply
discarding humanity is indeed about reaching a place perhaps beyond forgiveness, beyond healing or rehabilitation, beyond the ability to make ammends. does evil exist? i don't know for sure, but serial murderers and war mongers have made me wonder. how do we explain Hitler, Idi Amin, genocide in general?
what i do believe is that i damage my own humanity when i set out to damage another intentionally.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment