|
Mess up, fess up Wednesday, September 02, 2009 at 2:24 AM
Scenario 1:
B's speeding in the wrong lane, up a slope.. and BAM! Hits G, who is driving in the other lane.
Accident happens. No one gets injured but both parties are shaken by the accident. G comforts B even though B is obviously in the wrong, to alleviate the guilt that B feels. G doesn't even yell and shout at B.
One day passes, and by right, B should have reported the accident to the police. NAH. Not at all. Therefore G can't even claim the insurance for the car. To make things worse, B even turns around and ACCUSES G of hitting him first!
#1: By refusing to take responsibility for his mistake, B created additional trouble for G.
#2: B exploited the situation; took a chance, and pushed the blame to G.
If the mistake was already made, B should jolly well have the guts to admit and be willing to face up to whatever consequences, however reluctant.
HOW DOES B THINK HE CAN GET AWAY WITH THIS, SERIOUSLY.
Scenario 2:
B goes through rough patch. G's there for a friend, as a friend that genuinely cares. Hours days pass. Friendship deepens through open and honest communication. After a few odd weeks, seemingly gradual, everything disappears. G is puzzled, but then figures out what's happening. Slowly it becomes clear that B doesn't really care, and is just conveniently running away from current situation. No explanation whatsoever, rendering all previous verbal discussions invalid. B even says that the behavior of G might have prompted B to think in a way that wasn't possibly true. Well then, the very least B could do, was to simply state that more time was needed to reconsider certain issues. IT'S ONLY POLITE. G should have just known better.
#1: Wth is so hard about B giving a suggestion about talking it through. Talking first beats running away anytime.
#2: The very act of B running away makes G feel that the trust has been misplaced in B. Irresponsible way of settling matters.
You know what's similar in these 2 scenarios? I see insincerity at its very best.
Tell me, has kindness and trust been extended to all the wrong people? Or was it just a case of misjudgment. As much as trust is an intangible thing, it's the glue that keeps all relationships together. And once it's broken.. it's hard to find it back. Unless one puts in effort, shows and proves that he or she deserves the trust, there will always be this indelible gap that was caused by the breach of trust before.
Moral of these two scenarios? To not just trust blindly, but to trust with the head and the heart. Cause perhaps, not everyone's deserving of the benefit of doubt.
|
|
|
Mess up, fess up
Wednesday, September 02, 2009 at 2:24 AM
Scenario 1:
B's speeding in the wrong lane, up a slope.. and BAM! Hits G, who is driving in the other lane.
Accident happens. No one gets injured but both parties are shaken by the accident. G comforts B even though B is obviously in the wrong, to alleviate the guilt that B feels. G doesn't even yell and shout at B.
One day passes, and by right, B should have reported the accident to the police. NAH. Not at all. Therefore G can't even claim the insurance for the car. To make things worse, B even turns around and ACCUSES G of hitting him first!
#1: By refusing to take responsibility for his mistake, B created additional trouble for G.
#2: B exploited the situation; took a chance, and pushed the blame to G.
If the mistake was already made, B should jolly well have the guts to admit and be willing to face up to whatever consequences, however reluctant.
HOW DOES B THINK HE CAN GET AWAY WITH THIS, SERIOUSLY.
Scenario 2:
B goes through rough patch. G's there for a friend, as a friend that genuinely cares. Hours days pass. Friendship deepens through open and honest communication. After a few odd weeks, seemingly gradual, everything disappears. G is puzzled, but then figures out what's happening. Slowly it becomes clear that B doesn't really care, and is just conveniently running away from current situation. No explanation whatsoever, rendering all previous verbal discussions invalid. B even says that the behavior of G might have prompted B to think in a way that wasn't possibly true. Well then, the very least B could do, was to simply state that more time was needed to reconsider certain issues. IT'S ONLY POLITE. G should have just known better.
#1: Wth is so hard about B giving a suggestion about talking it through. Talking first beats running away anytime.
#2: The very act of B running away makes G feel that the trust has been misplaced in B. Irresponsible way of settling matters.
You know what's similar in these 2 scenarios? I see insincerity at its very best.
Tell me, has kindness and trust been extended to all the wrong people? Or was it just a case of misjudgment. As much as trust is an intangible thing, it's the glue that keeps all relationships together. And once it's broken.. it's hard to find it back. Unless one puts in effort, shows and proves that he or she deserves the trust, there will always be this indelible gap that was caused by the breach of trust before.
Moral of these two scenarios? To not just trust blindly, but to trust with the head and the heart. Cause perhaps, not everyone's deserving of the benefit of doubt.
|
|
|
About me
Hiii I’m trix.
Live study work play love
|
|
|