fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3435 ]

[ SECRET POST #3435 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3435 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 38 secrets from Secret Submission Post #491.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

It's relevant because OP's secret says "I immediately abandon anyone who has acted reprehensibly toward me (or in general)." OP doesn't specify degree. It sounds like OP means not just people who are repeatedly and unapologetically abusive, but anyone who has hurt them in any significant way, or possibly any way at all, or behaved in a way OP doesn't approve of.

And nobody is "shaming people because they're not perfect." My point was that you should treat people as you hope they would treat you--in this case, that you should forgive people who may have hurt you because you're an imperfect person who sometimes hurts others, and you presumably hope that they would not "immediately abandon" you without further ado.

It's quite reasonable to ask OP if they think they're so perfect that they've never done anything hurtful in their life to anyone they care about. Few people could truthfully say that they never have. (Some, perhaps, think they haven't, but I'd be willing to bet the other people in their life would have a different opinion.)

My point was that you should treat people as you hope they would treat you--in this case, that you should forgive people who may have hurt you because you're an imperfect person who sometimes hurts others, and you presumably hope that they would not "immediately abandon" you without further ado.

And I'm saying that's selfish, toxic bullshit. If your only reason for forgiving someone is in the hope you get a second chance out of it, you are not worth forgiving. Period. Because you obviously don't know or care what you did wrong, you just care that people are mad at you for it.

Not OP, but I answered your question below that yes, I DO in fact expect to be dumped and cut off if I've hurt someone. Funny how you don't have a response to that.

Ooookay, so treating others as you would hope to be treated is "selfish, toxic bullshit." Not touching that with a ten foot pole.

That wasn't what I said at all. Only doing something "good" after asking "what's in it for me?" is selfish, toxic bullshit.

Isn't "reprehensibly" implying a (fairly serious) degree in and of itself?

"reprehensible" just means "blame-worthy." That covers a lot of ground.

Some definitions for "reprehensible" (first five listed on Google):
deserving censure or condemnation (Google)
deserving of reproof, rebuke, or censure; blameworthy (Dictionary.com)
bringing or deserving severe rebuke or censure (Vocabulary.com)
very bad : deserving very strong criticism (Merriam-Webster)
If someone's behaviour is reprehensible, it is extremely bad or unacceptable (Cambridge English Dictionary)

Note the "severe", "very", and "extremely" in those definitions. Also "censure", ie "strong or vehement expression of disapproval".

There's a lot more nuance to the word than you've been claiming.

And note that "severe," "very," and "extremely" aren't in all of those definitions. Let me guess: you're probably the same person who said "I literally vomit whenever someone posts a dictionary definition to prove a point," downthread.

But all of those definitions contain at least one of those, or "censure" which has "strong" in its definition.
Put together, every definition is saying that "reprehensible" is a very strong term.

And pfft, nope, not me. I'm (quietly) against the misuse of "literally" as emphasis.
Just like I'm against your muddying of the definition of "reprehensible".

I have never heard it used in a way to mean anything other than "terrible". Have you? Is that common/accepted usage?

Basically, how plausible is it that OP was using the word "reprehensible" to mean "anything, no matter how small, that hurt me"? I really don't think that's likely.

Edited 2016-06-01 15:05 (UTC)

Not entirely implausible, when you come right down to it, since we don't know what OP finds blameworthy, or even terrible. For all we know, it might include things that you or I would think innocuous. For some people, any departure from perfect is "terrible."

Ok, but any secret is open to interpretation given that we don't know everything going on in OP's mind. It is, however, reasonable to make some basic extrapolations based on the information we have. You sound like you are reaching pretty hard to make it fit a less likely interpretation.

The words OP used were "mistreated" (implies abuse), "evil" (shouldn't have to explain that) and "reprehensibly" (as an anon pointed out that pretty much excludes mild or moderate acts of wrongdoing). What exactly did OP say to make you think their response covered ALL forms of hurt?

Edited 2016-05-31 18:14 (UTC)

Reprehensible just means blameworthy; that covers an awful lot of ground. "Immediately abandon" also suggests that OP doesn't stop to hear the other person's side of it--in other words, OP is proceeding on the assumption that they're incapable of misunderstanding or of blaming the wrong person. In short, OP sounds exactly like the few actually toxic people I know--people who can't see themselves as anything but the injured party, and who are always totting up the wrongs done to their blameless selves by others.

I still think you're reading a lot into it - or at least, we're reading very different things. My impression was "once someone has hurt me badly [implied: and I know it was them], I no longer wish to have a relationship with them".

Some stuff is uncertain and hearing the other person's side of it can help. But in some instances - say, if you walk in on your SO cheating on you - there's not a lot that has to be said. Some people prefer to talk after something like that, and some just prefer to leave.

In short, OP sounds exactly like the few actually toxic people I know

...are you sure you're not projecting? 'cause it really kinda sounds like you are.

It really sounds like AYRT has serious abandonment issues that they're projecting like fuck onto other people. Which in itself proves they're pretty toxic.

I don't think I would call them toxic for that. But projecting? Very likely.

I actually understand what it's like to have abandonment problems, so if that's true, I feel for them. (Though I don't think it makes them right in this case.)

The fact they separate "being sorry" from "being forgiven" tells me they're plenty toxic. The only people I've seen that pattern in are those who really don't care what they did wrong, they just care that they got caught and you're mad at them for it.

I guess I don't agree (necessarily) from the information we have. Could be.

IDK, I pointed out that one reason to forgive people who have hurt you is that you are an imperfect being who may one day be in need of forgiveness. Because you never know when something you or I might think innocuous turns out to hurt someone. Because "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"--does that ring any bells? This is the first time I've ever heard the Golden Rule called "selfish, toxic bullshit," so I'm really shaking my head over all this.

Because you're expecting to be forgiven simply because "nobody's perfect" rather than "because you're actually sorry." That is selfish. You are not entitled to anybody's forgiveness.

I feel like you are really being deliberately obtuse here. No one except you has said anything about "expecting" to be forgiven, or being
entitled" to it because "nobody's perfect." Let me break it down for you step by step.

(1) A reason to forgive others

(2) is that we ourselves are not perfect and may one day be in need of forgiveness--because nobody gets through life without sinning against others (yes, I went there)

(3) so we act toward others (forgiving those who have wronged us) as we would wish and hope for them to act toward us.

Whether or not they're sorry might have a bearing on whether we want to forgive them, or whether we feel safe forgiving them. But really, the only reason we need to forgive others is that we might one day need the same ourselves, and that we should treat others the way we would hope to be treated. It doesn't, of course, mean we will be forgiven, whether we're sorry or not. After all, no one has to forgive anyone, no matter how sorry they are.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-06-02 03:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-06-02 04:01 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-06-02 04:35 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-06-02 04:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-06-02 04:50 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-06-02 10:29 (UTC) - Expand

You seem to be unable to understand, based on this and other comments, that there are different degrees of badness and hurt. Cheating on someone, hitting them outside of self-defense, or publicly humiliating them as a form of control or out of malice are FAR worse than, say, accidentally using a name they don't like, playing a low-level prank, or saying something mean in a heated moment. Like we all do bad things, and mean things, but people make choices about doing things that really, seriously hurt others. Just because I have accidentally said hurtful things or been late to dinner dates doesn't mean that I don't deserve forgiveness for those if I am reluctant to forgive someone for hurting me far more seriously.

Also, you are twisting the meaning of the golden rule in a way that is set up to guilt trip people for not being perfect victims, and yes, I am willing to call that selfish and toxic. The golden rule should be applied to yourself, not twisted and used to beat other people over the head for not being as self-sacrificing as you think they should be to accept that they're not terrible people. That's honestly pretty manipulative. Nobody is entitled to forgiveness.

(And for the record, I am very pro-forgiveness, but I think it should be done for the right reasons; believing you won't ever deserve to be forgiven for minor fuckups if you don't do it is not the right reason, and nor is believing that you have to save up forgiveness karma in case you ever make a big screw up so you'll have enough in the bank for someone else to forgive you.)

Edited 2016-06-02 02:02 (UTC)

I feel you're setting up a false dichotomy between "really bad" acts like cheating or publicly humiliating someone out of malice or for the sake of control, and "low-level" acts like snapping at someone when you're stressed or being late to a dinner date, which you are willing to regard as forgivable because you don't see them as serious, and they were accidental or done in a heated moment rather than with malice aforethought. (Really, how petty would you have to be to refuse to forgive someone for being late to a dinner date?)

You're proceeding from the assumption that "real, serious hurt" is always inflicted deliberately and not thoughtlessly, that what we perceive as "minor fuckups" never do major harm. (I'm also getting the vibe that you are operating from the premise that you are a person who has never and would never really, seriously hurt anyone, so you don't have to worry about doing anything that someone might refuse to forgive you for.)

Please point me to where I have said anyone is "entitled" to forgiveness, or where I laid down any requirements for being a "perfect victim." And I certainly never suggested that treating others as you would hope to be treated yourself is a deposit of karma in the forgiveness bank. It's certainly not a guarantee and I never suggested that it was one. If anyone is twisting the Golden Rule, it is you.

(no subject)

diet_poison - 2016-06-02 13:37 (UTC) - Expand

"Immediately abandon" also suggests that OP doesn't stop to hear the other person's side of it

Dude. If you're being an abusive piece of shit, I don't care what "your side" of it is. You are out of my life, immediately, because I have no tolerance for abusive people.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only