Originally Posted by CielDuMatin
I would caution against using sweeping absolutes in statements like this. Omission, when agreed up, isn't always potentially problematic. I disagree that complete openness is always the ideal, either. I really, really think that it is up to the relationship dynamic to determine how much openness is appropriate and to live by that.
Could I perhaps try to rephrase that, and see if we have common ground, here?
"In the big picture, is my action contributing to us approaching the level of openness that on which we have, or is it moving further away from it."
If you and your partners have the goal of total openness then it applies. If others choose not to be that open, it can work too.
First, there is a vast difference between problematic and potentially problematic. I would like to see ONE example of non-trivial lack of openness that is not potentially problematic. I haven't so far, and through the years I have seen a few cases. If it gives problems in just one out of thousand cases, it is still potentially problematic. This does not mean it might not be the best thing to do, it simply means that it could be counted among risk-taking behaviors. Which most of us engage in, to some extent.
Second, we may have different mental images of "openness". To me, that is not like a room I will have to enter through, but more like an unlocked door, so that I may enter there. I think striving for openness will necessitate the development of tact and carefulness, which to me is one of the reasons for making it an ideal. Ideals may be like the stars: Good for navigation, bad for travel destinations.
I fully agree with your suggestion of "appropriate openness" - I believe that's what it should boil down to in practice. In everyday life, I think most of us have lots of "don't ask, don't tell"s in our relationships - but that is about things that don't matter so much. As soon as there is one thing I should have known and I don't, the situation is radically different, in my view.