View Single Post
  #37  
Old 01-11-2010, 08:32 AM
DrunkenPorcupine's Avatar
DrunkenPorcupine DrunkenPorcupine is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 175
Default

Polynerdist, I've actually got a few "issues" with some of the things you posted. Perhaps they're negated by the post as a whole, because it in general, I think I agree, but with some specific issues, I'd like to see what you think about X.

Quote:
positive energy is given without expectation of reciprocation. People give love, time, attention, help, support, and share resources
I've seen this specific dynamic backfire. Relationships for me are give and take. If they didn't do something for me, and likewise, the people I'm involved with, they wouldn't be WORTH nurturing or even preserving. I disagree fundimentally with the idea that someone should give of themselves without expecting some form of reward or benefit. Furthermore, to feed off one of your latter points, I think it's IMPOSSIBLE to honor oneself as a unique, thinking individual without thinking about self-benefit.

I've even venture to say that doing so is abusive.

I agree with your latter point WHOLEHEARTEDLY about both honoring the individual AND the relationship, and I don't mean my points above to negate that. But I suppose I'm wondering what your stance on that as a whole is. If someone's in an abusive or one-sided relationship, would you feel it's a virtue to "give [...] without expection of reciprication"?

Also, "sharing resources" could be interpreted vaguely as in the aforementioned "love and affection" or more specifically as "time" or "money". I'm a huge fan of sharing with people I love, don't get me wrong, but I'm not sure I'd hold "sharing resources" as an ideal itself. There are some people, for having various value sets, that I'd not want to share my resources with. One of my core values is the ability to produce and provide for oneself. This sort of goes to the "honoring the individual" thing I mentioned before; I believe there is no such THING as a human being who can't produce or provide for themselves in some way or form. Someone entering a relationship with me claiming they could NOT would be them claiming that they are not humanl that they provide no value, that they are worthless. This would seem to conflict to me with your latter points.

Quote:
the individuals take 100% responsibility for their own life and for the quality of the relationship(s)
I have to see I think these two points to be in conflict themselves. Relationships require individuals and as such, different valuations of the same actions. For a single person to take "100% responsibility" for the quality of the relationship would seem to both absolve, and burden (chicken... egg... egg... chicken...) the people in that relationship. I see how people could take 100% responsibility for themselves, but claiming that you (or redpepper) are 100% responsible for your relationship working seem to dishonor both you and redpepper as individuals, in my eyes, and conflict with your points later.
Reply With Quote