---political correctness of the highest order---
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
template for perusal
recent shenanigans have caused me to re-evaluate the concept of friendship.
what is friendship?
the mutual acknowledging of each other's existence?
nah..too generic.
how about one of the core tenets of society that spur the study of socialization?
too scientific.
perhaps the wilingness to throw oneself in the path of inconvenience in place of another?
nope...too emo.
obviously 'friendship' isn't gonna have some easy be all end all definition everyone will agree on. i'd like to envision myself as someone who's eloquent in both verbal and written dialogue but the truth is, no one will ever be able to define 'friendship' in such a way that no one else will feel compelled to disagree, much less myself.
are there expectations in friendships? i would think so. the more important question to probe is are these expectations a result of mutual understanding between 2 parties or an imposition by one on the other?
'i expect my friends to be loyal'
adopting a normalistic approach, i would assume such a statement would be viewed as 'correct' or more aptly put, 'universal'. there would be little contest to the validity of this statement and in short, everyone's happy.
now what about this?
'friends must accept me for who i am'
generally speaking this statement can be regarded as correctness of the political kind. it is entirely possible to walk up to anyone you deem a 'friend' and yell such a mantra into their face and be able to walk away unscathed. however, does 'acceptance' equal 'embracement'? i don't think so. i can accept the existence of indians but it hell doesn't mean i'm gonna adopt their ten thousand gods, friend or no friend.
therefore, cast into a similar light, doesn't the above phrase translate into the causal interpretation of 'i'm supposed to accept whatever bullshit my friend throws at me because he's just being himself and even though it pisses me off, i'm still all fine n dandy just because he's my friend'?
to compound things further, what if my expectations of a friend differs from my 'friend'? how then do we resolve the acceptance of someone as a whole without going against our own personal expectations? compromise? how then do we decide what to compromise, the amount of compromise by each person and the value of compromise put forth by each person? in the end, both parties do not achieve the satisfaction desired although some mutual point may be reached.
in simple terms, if my 'friend' can't measure up to my universal expectations of a friend and i'm supposed to accept him for who he is, am i supposed to lower my expectations or is he supposed to measure up? or do we compromise and i lower my expectations of a 'friend' and he changes into someone he's not? its not hard to see that both parties end up getting screwed over.
in the end, who's right and who's wrong? or are we both right and wrong? do we impose our expectations on our 'friends' and expect them to conform to our universal standards? or are we just being constipated shits who can't accept someone dear to us who doesn't accord to those universal standards? in hindsight perhaps we may have been too harsh..or too lenient however way you put it.
i think we need to consider for a bit what exactly makes a true 'friend'.
i may feel too lazy to communicate with my gf for a day or two but does it mean i don't love her?
it may sound really hypocritical but i fear we may have been harping on the small trivial things and neglecting the true instances when friendship truly came through...
GOT SOMETHING TO SAY??
-e|even¹¹-
what is friendship?
the mutual acknowledging of each other's existence?
nah..too generic.
how about one of the core tenets of society that spur the study of socialization?
too scientific.
perhaps the wilingness to throw oneself in the path of inconvenience in place of another?
nope...too emo.
obviously 'friendship' isn't gonna have some easy be all end all definition everyone will agree on. i'd like to envision myself as someone who's eloquent in both verbal and written dialogue but the truth is, no one will ever be able to define 'friendship' in such a way that no one else will feel compelled to disagree, much less myself.
are there expectations in friendships? i would think so. the more important question to probe is are these expectations a result of mutual understanding between 2 parties or an imposition by one on the other?
'i expect my friends to be loyal'
adopting a normalistic approach, i would assume such a statement would be viewed as 'correct' or more aptly put, 'universal'. there would be little contest to the validity of this statement and in short, everyone's happy.
now what about this?
'friends must accept me for who i am'
generally speaking this statement can be regarded as correctness of the political kind. it is entirely possible to walk up to anyone you deem a 'friend' and yell such a mantra into their face and be able to walk away unscathed. however, does 'acceptance' equal 'embracement'? i don't think so. i can accept the existence of indians but it hell doesn't mean i'm gonna adopt their ten thousand gods, friend or no friend.
therefore, cast into a similar light, doesn't the above phrase translate into the causal interpretation of 'i'm supposed to accept whatever bullshit my friend throws at me because he's just being himself and even though it pisses me off, i'm still all fine n dandy just because he's my friend'?
to compound things further, what if my expectations of a friend differs from my 'friend'? how then do we resolve the acceptance of someone as a whole without going against our own personal expectations? compromise? how then do we decide what to compromise, the amount of compromise by each person and the value of compromise put forth by each person? in the end, both parties do not achieve the satisfaction desired although some mutual point may be reached.
in simple terms, if my 'friend' can't measure up to my universal expectations of a friend and i'm supposed to accept him for who he is, am i supposed to lower my expectations or is he supposed to measure up? or do we compromise and i lower my expectations of a 'friend' and he changes into someone he's not? its not hard to see that both parties end up getting screwed over.
in the end, who's right and who's wrong? or are we both right and wrong? do we impose our expectations on our 'friends' and expect them to conform to our universal standards? or are we just being constipated shits who can't accept someone dear to us who doesn't accord to those universal standards? in hindsight perhaps we may have been too harsh..or too lenient however way you put it.
i think we need to consider for a bit what exactly makes a true 'friend'.
i may feel too lazy to communicate with my gf for a day or two but does it mean i don't love her?
it may sound really hypocritical but i fear we may have been harping on the small trivial things and neglecting the true instances when friendship truly came through...
GOT SOMETHING TO SAY??
-e|even¹¹-
