The idea of pacifying discomforts by plastering your face with fake plastic
smiles is clearly a contentious one, and more than often, a hyperbolic remedial
method. That is a controversial issue
simply because most people seem to take smiles as they come (I mean, even a
fake smile is a smile after all, and it could hardly be differentiated from a
true one merely from its appearance). Most people wouldn’t bother to care about
the true nature of the smile. Similarly, when people accept apologies, they’re
basically supposed to be okay with you. But sometimes, even when you can quite
clearly see that they’re holding something back, you can’t just force them to
admit that you aren’t forgiven, because the common convention is that being
forgiven or being told you’re forgiven is acceptable, regardless of the actuality of things.
But feelings do not always go with conventions, do they?
And however insane it may sound, losing the ability to hurt people, is strangely, tragic (I am extremely cautious when I am saying this because it isn’t about “deliberately” hurting someone. That would be crude criminality or cowardice. That could be sadistic, and depending on the nature of the act, it could also be an attempt to force sympathy out of someone). Generally, when someone (someone important) is hurt because of you, it is due to your noteworthiness in relation to them, which in turns, implies that you are valued for something (to say the least). It highlights the fact that you actually possess some elements that could possibly invite a passive disappointment from them. “Not being able to hurt” quite clearly is an indicator of the frivolity in your influence or the futility of your existence. At some points, people might get so indifferent to you, it may actually force you to realize that you are no longer an appropriate subject to hold a grudge against. When people wouldn’t just bother to be bothered by you or your presence, the feelings that follow might well and truly be excruciating.
Frustrations are sometimes spilled out in the form of an unconditional, and irrelevant rage which clearly reflects nothing but an obscure inability to ascertain with inner frailties that constitutes us. They might go unnoticed, but if they are read, they would certainly serve a great deal in outlining a personality trait. It’s the outburst of that rage that characterizes a person. Possibly not the intensity or the magnitude, but the relevance and the meaning of it. Anger doesn’t always need an external catalyst. Sometimes, the external factors only serve to ignite the matches of our inner complex, defenselessness that are awaiting a spark.
Sometimes, pain can be quantified by relative impacts of a loss. In reference to the relationships where inevitability of a separation, (rather than the inadaptability, escalating stresses or irreparable voids) is the only issue, there exists a room for post-estrangement trauma. Even in the most worked out separations, the most resolved ones, either party has a clear idea of who shared the larger part of the blame, who was the one who couldn’t hold on for the good. Therefore, that pain can be quantified in terms of who was on the side of a relatively harsher treatment.
And however insane it may sound, losing the ability to hurt people, is strangely, tragic (I am extremely cautious when I am saying this because it isn’t about “deliberately” hurting someone. That would be crude criminality or cowardice. That could be sadistic, and depending on the nature of the act, it could also be an attempt to force sympathy out of someone). Generally, when someone (someone important) is hurt because of you, it is due to your noteworthiness in relation to them, which in turns, implies that you are valued for something (to say the least). It highlights the fact that you actually possess some elements that could possibly invite a passive disappointment from them. “Not being able to hurt” quite clearly is an indicator of the frivolity in your influence or the futility of your existence. At some points, people might get so indifferent to you, it may actually force you to realize that you are no longer an appropriate subject to hold a grudge against. When people wouldn’t just bother to be bothered by you or your presence, the feelings that follow might well and truly be excruciating.
Frustrations are sometimes spilled out in the form of an unconditional, and irrelevant rage which clearly reflects nothing but an obscure inability to ascertain with inner frailties that constitutes us. They might go unnoticed, but if they are read, they would certainly serve a great deal in outlining a personality trait. It’s the outburst of that rage that characterizes a person. Possibly not the intensity or the magnitude, but the relevance and the meaning of it. Anger doesn’t always need an external catalyst. Sometimes, the external factors only serve to ignite the matches of our inner complex, defenselessness that are awaiting a spark.
Sometimes, pain can be quantified by relative impacts of a loss. In reference to the relationships where inevitability of a separation, (rather than the inadaptability, escalating stresses or irreparable voids) is the only issue, there exists a room for post-estrangement trauma. Even in the most worked out separations, the most resolved ones, either party has a clear idea of who shared the larger part of the blame, who was the one who couldn’t hold on for the good. Therefore, that pain can be quantified in terms of who was on the side of a relatively harsher treatment.
Comments
Post a Comment