Why is it that in times of great stress and frustration we treat the ones we love like they are the cause for the problem?We pick the ones we love because they are easy targets, we got dirt on them and it's easy dirt to fling. Seldom the cause of anger or frustration is the cause for one single person, a group of people or anyone in general. A person acts as the receptacle for outburst and anger. It is much easier to direct anger towards a physical being rather then to look at the moments that happened to bring you to this place of anger.
We can blame the words people say, the way they say them, the things people do or the way they do them but in the end is that the actual problem?
A person is more or less used a catalyst to start listing off a huge list of issues someone may have. I'm mad because you did this, I'm sad because you did this, it's all bullshit excuses to not address the real issue at hand.
People don't make us do anything and the people that make us feel a certain way just prove to us that we have little control over ourselves and lack the inside and awareness in that moment to recognize our actions and our emotions. We assume the emotions that people give to us instead of looking at our own.
Words can hurt this is true, negative attitude can be infectious but how weak have our barriers become? If someone calls you selfish are you hurt because it's not true, are you mad because it is true or are you at peace because their opinion does not control the way you see yourself. If you see yourself as not selfish, then you are in fact not selfish. Not selfish based on your guidelines of what it means to be selfish because isn't that how this all works. We base our morality and actions on guidelines which are mostly made up from society and then pushed upon us until we tweak them into something we're able to cling onto and govern our lives based on them.
I many not seem selfish based on my guidelines but to someone's else I may seem incredibly selfish. I may not seem impatient based on my guidelines but again someone might not see it this way. Take a group of all different kinds of people and present this story to them:
Dave is a kid trying to support his mother and siblings by working two jobs, he notices one job underpays him so he takes a little out of the till each night to make up for it. Walking home he sees some food waiting to be picked up from a large truck so he takes it. He gets robbed and kills the man in self defence.
Make your judgements about what is right and wrong in that story and the change Daves name to Muhammad and tell me what is right and wrong in this story.
You will get a million deferent reasons why actions were considered good or bad and why. And right there you have the difference between people's guidelines, how those guidelines were formed and how they use them to see the world and cast judgement.
"You've made me mad!"
"You make me feel like are all the decisions are on me and that we're stuck in this position because of me"
"How have I made you feel that way"
"You eluded to it"
"So me asking questions, in your mind that had a tone and that tone transformed my words to a poisonous elusiveness?"
"The way I ask questions are straight to the point when it's something serious, I gauge that as being okay"
"Well I find straight to the point questions rude and elusive"
If only fights could be that smooth and end in clarity. Let's then fast forward let's say 6 hours later when the fuelled up one has time sober up we can see the underlying issue is that one person feels guilt for the places the two of them are stuck. It's not the fact someone asks direct questions and someone doesn't like them. The difference there is in the gauges, the guidelines each have. They see differently how to word questions and then when a difficult problem comes around, instead of talking about the difficult topic, it's much easier to create simpler problems like tone of voice used and then make it all about that.
Arguments come about not from the issues but from the issues it creates. It shows gaps in the guidelines of where people hold their morals.
-the point at which you start yelling
-the point at which you start swearing,
-the point at which you start crying
And if you're in an argument when someone starts yelling way before you do, the argument then becomes about the yelling because according to your gage there shouldn't be yelling right now.
The key is not to have similar guidelines because that would be near impossible between men and women especially. I think the only option is to accept each other's gages, know where they are and when a trigger can be switched because once the trigger is switched, the topic then becomes about that and a whole lot of time has been wasted for nothing.
Have you ever been in an absolute stupid argument as it starts off simple enough and all of a sudden you're not talking for hours and it wasn't for the main issue but because of how either one acted in the argument.
It's like we're children and we're putting ourselves in a time out.
You find these issues amongst children all the way up until the elderly and someone needs to be doing some kind of education regarding it because it is a relationship killer, a time waster and a negative energy.
You may say that, why don't we have no guidelines where anyone can do and say what they want. You see the problem is very obvious and that is, where does it end? Where does it end with yelling, hitting, stealing. Guidelines are unwritten laws that the people have made and they basically form a society based on that. Rules are rules and police inform them but it is the true power of the people on how a society acts. Racial slander is not commonly used in public, why? Because a lot of people's guidelines won't tolerate it. So, what I'm saying is you need counter guidelines just as we need good and bad simply to differentiate the two. You cannot say something good, without experiencing bad so why say an action is good without experiencing a bad one.
The rules for guidelines and gages and guidelines:
Figure out your moral gages but be flexible.
Figure out someone else's moral gages but be flexible.
Learn for those gages to work in harmony; back off when you must and proceed when it's clear.
Re evaluate your guidelines constantly.
Remember that we all rationalize thoughts, feelings and emotions based on what we think is rational, which might not be someone else's idea of rational. Keep in mind the balance that must be made and never say you don't care or that you've given up because each one of us contributes to the ever teetering balance of what is right and wrong.