Ayn Rand
Do not make the mistake of the ignorant who think that an individualist is a man who says: “I’ll do as I please at everybody else’s expense.” An individualist is a man who recognizes the inalienable individual rights of man—his own and those of others.
“Textbook of Americanism,” The Ayn Rand Column, 84
The other day, I heard a psychologist talk about expectations in relationships. He made the point that expectations make for conflict/"war". Expectations are those "goals", images, desires, hopes, and dreams that are put upon the relationship or the other individual. Though our culture "romanticizes" love and creates what "happily ever afters" must look like, real people must step back long enough to ask themselves and thier mates what are their goals, hopes, dreams, desires, and images of marriage. Otherwise, one will always be frustrated because thier "mate just doesn't get it", and you really won't understand why. But, this way, you can count on having a "real relationship" that is based on real communication with another person, which is not defined by a role or function of one marital partner, but mutuality, compromise, negotiation, and respect.
In civil societies, we come to expect that people will obey the law, where we can live peaceable lives, depending on the mutuality that paints our society. Time has meaning in our society, because Americans believe that deadlines are respect for those that are waiting on you to meet them. When an American makes a date, whether a professional or social one, it is considered disrespectful and dishonoring to be late, without calling with an explaination and apology. This is a common courtesy to not presume upon another individual's time/life. And it doesn't much matter whether the one late is the employer or the employee, as to its message. Americans understand that business does not function apart from the employee, and good businessman knows how to entice and convince an employee to join his enterprise. Collaboration is the "food" of business partnerships, and building teams that meet the expectations of their investors. This is what has prospered America economically; trust, respect, co-operation, and mutuality.
How does free and open communicaton and a respect for individual lives make for a better life? It doesn't if one believes that men and women are unequal, in their personhood. If men and women are looked at as only thier gender identity and form their expectations based on that alone, then, it limits personhood to a particular role or function that is "expected Such structuring of a relationship might be easier to "correct", but it is not fulfilling to the individuals involved. Society might function smoothly, and might benefit by these simple roles/functions, but is society where the ultimate focus should be? Society, as the predominat value in this scenario, is justified to over-ride individual liberties because society cannot function apart from a fully functioning family. And a functioning family is considered in some circles to be a man and a woman, producing children. Society does not have the complexities to discuss when such limitations are the norming "norms". But, how do we address those at either "ends" of marital definition?
Those, who believe that polygamy should be allowed to define marriage, have different expectations of women and the relationship between the husband and wife, than a traditional marriage would. The woman is useful for the man's pleasure and procreation of his familial line. But, the woman has little say, even when they have the "right" to approve of a "newly elected" wife. Should this type of marriage be allowed in our society? Why or why not? Wouldn't it meet the requirements of a fully functioning marriage, a family? Polygomous marriages is a partiarcial view (expectation) of marriage.
On the opposite end, are same sex couples that expect that marriage should be defined by mutual consent, commaradie, and expectations. Is this not similar to the first communicative relationship that was affirmed? Is this kind of marriage to be allowed in our society? Why or why not? Is marriage about one's gender and function within the marital bed/relationship? Is marriage primarily about the ability to procreate?
In America, religious liberty is a value that cannot be undermined, unless we change our Constitutional government. We believe that the individual has a right to conscience in worshipping 'God' however he./she sees fit. No one can deny that priviledge, but it stops at the door of another's conscience, as one individual cannot impose their views, without hindering another's right to civil protections under law.
So, what should we desire for and in America, as to our expectations? Should we desire everyone have the same liberty we desire for ourselves? Should we desire that everyone believe like we do? How possible is it that with America's diversity that we will all see "eye to eye" on most everything? Aren't our diverse views understandings that make for great science in investigating such questions? Should we limit the diversity that is the seed-bed to discovery? I think not, that is my hope and expectation!
Showing posts with label expectations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label expectations. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
What Do You Do, When No One Listens?
What happens when people don't listen to YOU? Do you feel frustrated, alone, insignificant, devalued, ignored, minimized, dismissed or what? Perhaps, all these terms apply and this is what is so disturbing when people don't listen!
Has life taught you to expect others to listen because your parent valued your opinion, or at least, you, as a child and a separate being? Or has life taught you that no one listens, because they are too busy for YOU? "You" are those previous terms we used in our first paragraph? What happens when we don't take others seriously? Can we have expectations of them, when we have been dismissive and arrogant?
On a recent program I was listening to, a psychologist say that many conflicts occur because of hidden expectations. These unidentified expectatons are "key" to what we really want or need in a relationship. Expectation is about how we 'see" relationships, in general, and if they are not addressed, there is not much hope of relationship.
Relationships are about two people or groups of people that have certain desires and these groups/people are "formed" by expectations. These expectations frame/interpret our judgments of another's "love" :"value" or "care" of us, as persons. Many times unconscious demands on another's life is what really bothers those that can't seem to bend or express themselves in ways that are productive. These kinds of people are hard-core moralists that hold to a high road of superior vision, purpose, or design about/on life. Those not "in the game" are "not in the game". There is not much compromise in their view, as to compromise is to de-value their ultimates which are absolutes. Absolutes cannot be negotiated, as that would be 'kin" to treason. One must by loyal to principle before people.
When no one listens because they haven't understood or minimized your concern, what can you do? You can take responsibility for youself, and choose the road that seems most pertinant to your values and remember that even those that listen, might not listen well. So, take care of yourself and your own family.
Has life taught you to expect others to listen because your parent valued your opinion, or at least, you, as a child and a separate being? Or has life taught you that no one listens, because they are too busy for YOU? "You" are those previous terms we used in our first paragraph? What happens when we don't take others seriously? Can we have expectations of them, when we have been dismissive and arrogant?
On a recent program I was listening to, a psychologist say that many conflicts occur because of hidden expectations. These unidentified expectatons are "key" to what we really want or need in a relationship. Expectation is about how we 'see" relationships, in general, and if they are not addressed, there is not much hope of relationship.
Relationships are about two people or groups of people that have certain desires and these groups/people are "formed" by expectations. These expectations frame/interpret our judgments of another's "love" :"value" or "care" of us, as persons. Many times unconscious demands on another's life is what really bothers those that can't seem to bend or express themselves in ways that are productive. These kinds of people are hard-core moralists that hold to a high road of superior vision, purpose, or design about/on life. Those not "in the game" are "not in the game". There is not much compromise in their view, as to compromise is to de-value their ultimates which are absolutes. Absolutes cannot be negotiated, as that would be 'kin" to treason. One must by loyal to principle before people.
When no one listens because they haven't understood or minimized your concern, what can you do? You can take responsibility for youself, and choose the road that seems most pertinant to your values and remember that even those that listen, might not listen well. So, take care of yourself and your own family.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Entitlements, and Expectations.
The news is filled with the price of oil, which may go up because of the Middle East crisis. And the concern over who will be ruling these country's and if we can believe that they will consider our interests, as well as theirs. It seems like survival of the fittest, or all out "war" (using the term metphorically). Should these people have a right to "free themselves" from oppressive government?
Then the news on the housing market going down again. Where will it leave those that can't sell their house to move to take their new job? How will they afford another place to live? And will those that took advantage of loans given to those that had not proved their responsibility, rest on the shoulders of us all? And why? Because some "do-gooder" thought that a large stip-end might help the less fortunate, as always the case with "do-gooders". Does such an attitude promote entitlement mentality? Do the poor not have a right of existence, just as the politically oppressed in the Middle East?
Entitlement means that one can expect something. Entitlement means that someone else will give you whatever it is you want because you deserve it. Why would anyone think they deserve somethigt for nothing? But, then I had to quesiton myself.
I grew up with my grandfather. He has written me into his will. And even though I have not felt that I deserved it, as I was not his natural child. In fact, I wasn't even his natural grandchild. I had always been grateful to him for including me. But, this is just the problem. His inclusion of me is not based on a "felt earning of RIGHT". My "place" in the family was tenuous, or at least that was what I "felt". Not that he has given me that impression. No, he has always welcomed me.
But, recently I was having a conversation with a couple of childhood friends, expressing my fear of being excluded and rejected by others because of my place in my grandfather's heart. They assured me that I was fearing something that I had a "right" to, as I had grown up with him.
Then, I started thinking about my feelings, and I found that I really do feel entitled, not to more, but to equal treatment, because I had a place in his home. And my constant struggle to believe that I was just as entitled and then battle with the feelings of not "being worthy or valued enough" to have equal treatment, in speciific instances.
Why do humans feel entitled? Is it our society? Should humans feel entitled to fair and equal treatment? . Where is self-responsibility and a sense that what one earns, one deserves? Don't most people believe that work will equal a salary? And just what is a "just and fair" wage?
Union discussions in Wisconsin and those that make demands that their employer cannot meet are making Wisconsin and it citizens feel resentful and/or entitled, but to different things, because there is different needs. The children and parents want the teachers to teach, while the teachers have to make their 'ends" meet and make their jobs and time worthwhile with negotiated pay. What is one to think or do? Isn't Indiana's "right to work" a fair policy? Or is there to be some standardization to equalize the playing field where no one can have more than another....
Money and its meaning is a complex issue. One thing is for sure, one cannot take money lightly, because money signifies something of value. Entitlements must have to do with expectations. But, just because someone has expectations, doesn't mean that everyone will agree that those expectations are valid ones. Ones that need to be considered as "just' or fair.
TheTea Partiers are tired of the taxpayer picking up the tab for items that were not represented by their representatives on the campaign trail. The taxpayer feels entitled to equal representation as corporate interests or the Union bosses seem to have a special place at the table to our Representatives. The expectation in our society that we will not be politically oppressed, because of some "Big Whig" taking over and demanding that our hard-earned money be their "pork barrell"!
I think false expectations should be faced, not supported and encouraged, otherwise we enable the poor in their state and their expectations of a "hand-out". I don't think this is good for society or for the poor. And I think that political oppression needs accountability to "the people". Otherwise, those that abuse power will trample our expectations of a fair and just system under their feet and they won't even look back!
Economic and political justice are on the forefront of headline news. Both are volitile issues that must be addressed if the world is not to "go up in smoke" with another atomic bomb.
Then the news on the housing market going down again. Where will it leave those that can't sell their house to move to take their new job? How will they afford another place to live? And will those that took advantage of loans given to those that had not proved their responsibility, rest on the shoulders of us all? And why? Because some "do-gooder" thought that a large stip-end might help the less fortunate, as always the case with "do-gooders". Does such an attitude promote entitlement mentality? Do the poor not have a right of existence, just as the politically oppressed in the Middle East?
Entitlement means that one can expect something. Entitlement means that someone else will give you whatever it is you want because you deserve it. Why would anyone think they deserve somethigt for nothing? But, then I had to quesiton myself.
I grew up with my grandfather. He has written me into his will. And even though I have not felt that I deserved it, as I was not his natural child. In fact, I wasn't even his natural grandchild. I had always been grateful to him for including me. But, this is just the problem. His inclusion of me is not based on a "felt earning of RIGHT". My "place" in the family was tenuous, or at least that was what I "felt". Not that he has given me that impression. No, he has always welcomed me.
But, recently I was having a conversation with a couple of childhood friends, expressing my fear of being excluded and rejected by others because of my place in my grandfather's heart. They assured me that I was fearing something that I had a "right" to, as I had grown up with him.
Then, I started thinking about my feelings, and I found that I really do feel entitled, not to more, but to equal treatment, because I had a place in his home. And my constant struggle to believe that I was just as entitled and then battle with the feelings of not "being worthy or valued enough" to have equal treatment, in speciific instances.
Why do humans feel entitled? Is it our society? Should humans feel entitled to fair and equal treatment? . Where is self-responsibility and a sense that what one earns, one deserves? Don't most people believe that work will equal a salary? And just what is a "just and fair" wage?
Union discussions in Wisconsin and those that make demands that their employer cannot meet are making Wisconsin and it citizens feel resentful and/or entitled, but to different things, because there is different needs. The children and parents want the teachers to teach, while the teachers have to make their 'ends" meet and make their jobs and time worthwhile with negotiated pay. What is one to think or do? Isn't Indiana's "right to work" a fair policy? Or is there to be some standardization to equalize the playing field where no one can have more than another....
Money and its meaning is a complex issue. One thing is for sure, one cannot take money lightly, because money signifies something of value. Entitlements must have to do with expectations. But, just because someone has expectations, doesn't mean that everyone will agree that those expectations are valid ones. Ones that need to be considered as "just' or fair.
TheTea Partiers are tired of the taxpayer picking up the tab for items that were not represented by their representatives on the campaign trail. The taxpayer feels entitled to equal representation as corporate interests or the Union bosses seem to have a special place at the table to our Representatives. The expectation in our society that we will not be politically oppressed, because of some "Big Whig" taking over and demanding that our hard-earned money be their "pork barrell"!
I think false expectations should be faced, not supported and encouraged, otherwise we enable the poor in their state and their expectations of a "hand-out". I don't think this is good for society or for the poor. And I think that political oppression needs accountability to "the people". Otherwise, those that abuse power will trample our expectations of a fair and just system under their feet and they won't even look back!
Economic and political justice are on the forefront of headline news. Both are volitile issues that must be addressed if the world is not to "go up in smoke" with another atomic bomb.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
You Cannot Demand Relationship
I have spent the greater part of the morning trying to "discuss" (at least that was my thinking) a particular person's needs. She had called me, so I thought that this was a suggestion of her openness to me. But, unfortuately, one cannot demand a healthy living relationship.
Relationships have to be built on mutual trust, respect and a diligence to keep the communication lines open. Otherwise, the relationship become a one-sided attempt to keep alive what is really, dead.
This person doesn't seem to "give and take". And I find that if one doesn't agree with everything the person says, they feel defensive. Why the defenses? I'm not sure. But, what I do know is if one attempts to suggest another alternative interpretation about "what happened" or another's motivation, one will end up holding a phone that has gone dead. Or if I offer suggestions that might help a particular situation, there is a verbal attack. It is baffling and frustrating. But, I'm sure that the other's perspective could be similar, as to her preception of me! I just don't know!
When I attempt to make clear expectations, there is a justification and defensiveness that tells me, that this is more about "her" than "us". Maybe some people can't have relationships. Or maybe there is something that hasn't been expressed or shared that is the interpretive "frame" to everything that is said, or not said.
I have asked numerous people how to handle theis person and our relationship (or lack thereof) and most that know her seem to suggest that I really can't have a mutual relationship. I guess I just can't grasp that concept. Perhaps, I am the one that is co-dependent.
Demands upon another cannot offer real gifts of love, or sevice, but only demands of duty or obligation. This is what makes me so resistant to "requirements", such as duty, demands, commands, etc. I equate such terms with obligation, responsibility, and co-ercive and/or manipulative power.
Commitment must be a choice, but how does one commit to a relationship that isn't based on terms that define healthly relationship? can one commit to such a relationship and survive the deneigrating sense about onself? Can one have self-respect enough to overcome a bombardment of snide remarks, inuendo, and outright disrespect as to one's character or motivations or others that are mutually known? I am just at a stale-mate, as I don't know what to think or do or not do.
Why do I desire any relationship with this person? Whenever one begins to "enter" or think they enter the other's world, there is a slammed door, or so it seems. On the other hand, this person can have a overzealous conscientiousness about another relationship, to the extent of compulsion. I've been advised that one cannot have access to those that choose to not allow such access. And when I think about it, isn't this what I'd want? Respect for my boundaries and a honoring of my "right of denial"?
Relationships have to be built on mutual trust, respect and a diligence to keep the communication lines open. Otherwise, the relationship become a one-sided attempt to keep alive what is really, dead.
This person doesn't seem to "give and take". And I find that if one doesn't agree with everything the person says, they feel defensive. Why the defenses? I'm not sure. But, what I do know is if one attempts to suggest another alternative interpretation about "what happened" or another's motivation, one will end up holding a phone that has gone dead. Or if I offer suggestions that might help a particular situation, there is a verbal attack. It is baffling and frustrating. But, I'm sure that the other's perspective could be similar, as to her preception of me! I just don't know!
When I attempt to make clear expectations, there is a justification and defensiveness that tells me, that this is more about "her" than "us". Maybe some people can't have relationships. Or maybe there is something that hasn't been expressed or shared that is the interpretive "frame" to everything that is said, or not said.
I have asked numerous people how to handle theis person and our relationship (or lack thereof) and most that know her seem to suggest that I really can't have a mutual relationship. I guess I just can't grasp that concept. Perhaps, I am the one that is co-dependent.
Demands upon another cannot offer real gifts of love, or sevice, but only demands of duty or obligation. This is what makes me so resistant to "requirements", such as duty, demands, commands, etc. I equate such terms with obligation, responsibility, and co-ercive and/or manipulative power.
Commitment must be a choice, but how does one commit to a relationship that isn't based on terms that define healthly relationship? can one commit to such a relationship and survive the deneigrating sense about onself? Can one have self-respect enough to overcome a bombardment of snide remarks, inuendo, and outright disrespect as to one's character or motivations or others that are mutually known? I am just at a stale-mate, as I don't know what to think or do or not do.
Why do I desire any relationship with this person? Whenever one begins to "enter" or think they enter the other's world, there is a slammed door, or so it seems. On the other hand, this person can have a overzealous conscientiousness about another relationship, to the extent of compulsion. I've been advised that one cannot have access to those that choose to not allow such access. And when I think about it, isn't this what I'd want? Respect for my boundaries and a honoring of my "right of denial"?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
