I won't go into much detail for anonymity reasons, but I became aware of a family that had faced a very sad circumstance in their life. They were culturally very different from me. I had had some experience (and friendships) from people of that culture. However, those around me hadn't necessarily had the same. So, not everyone in my circle fully appreciated the family's reaction to their sad circumstance. When you broke down their reaction, the family's reaction is quite logical. Fully embracing it publicly could, at least in theory, involve the loss of face. Besides, as I discovered with the loss of my dad, mom and closest sibling in recent years, life and its grind and responsibilities do not stop just because you face hardship.
Searching and Fearless: Thoughts on Addiction/Codependence and Human Nature
This is a personal study on codependence, addictive, behavior and human nature in general. Please follow me and feel free to share your experiences and ideas. Please feel free to visit my sponsors if you like what I write. While I'm not in it for the money, it would be nice one day to transition to full-time writing.
Sunday, January 16, 2022
Accepting people even when you don't fully understand or appreciate them.
I won't go into much detail for anonymity reasons, but I became aware of a family that had faced a very sad circumstance in their life. They were culturally very different from me. I had had some experience (and friendships) from people of that culture. However, those around me hadn't necessarily had the same. So, not everyone in my circle fully appreciated the family's reaction to their sad circumstance. When you broke down their reaction, the family's reaction is quite logical. Fully embracing it publicly could, at least in theory, involve the loss of face. Besides, as I discovered with the loss of my dad, mom and closest sibling in recent years, life and its grind and responsibilities do not stop just because you face hardship.
Tuesday, November 30, 2021
Hubris and getting out of one's own way
I believe most people realize they don't know it all. Only a true narcissist would think that they do. However, I think a lot of people think they think they 'get it' when that's not necessarily the case. That is they think they are easily able to understand people and circumstances. In other words, they feel like they are easily able to assess people and/or situations based on their life experiences and other factors. The problem is that not everyone experiences or is taught life the same way. For example, a person who has spent his childhood being corrected the adult in their life, might view an innocent suggestion given as trying to control him or her. Whereas, a person who has felt like they've been heard even as a kid and might better read the speaker. They might properly view the same suggestion as an attempt to help them see an easier way to do something. This points to what I see a flaw in trying to read people and situations. Sometimes, our own personal experiences, rather then informing us, can cloud our ability to 'get it' when presented with a person or situation or circumstance. Sometimes, a mistaken assessment of our own knowledge and abilities--often based on what we've been taught--can get in the way of our understanding. Sometimes, both combine to get in the way of true understanding vs. a mistaken belief that we understand.
Why we misread others and circumstances.
- We have been told 'the way it is' time and again by those in authority whom we respect.
- It could be a parent, minister, teacher or someone whom we look up to.
- They may have emphasized that people who get poor grades are either a) ignorant or b) don't try hard enough. Sometimes, it is neither.
- They may have told us people from "that side of town" are more dangerous. This may be due to their own negative experiences and not based in fact or reality.
- They are/were very sincere in their explaining life as they see it.
- A strongly held belief if presented well, can be seen effectively as a 'truth'.
- A strongly held belief if asserted confidently enough can taken as a 'truth'.
- We wanted their approval or to emulate them, so we take what they say to heart.
- We don't want to be seen as lazy or a failure. So, we push ourselves and in the process come to believe that others who aren't "pushing themselves" don't care and/or are lazy.
- We have experienced what we saw as a similar situation on occasion in our own life.
- Whether it is from our own life or the life of someone close to us, we have made observations about situations. In other words, we believe we are familiar with that type of person or situation.
- For example, if people close to us have let us down, my may 'decide' that most people are 'in it' for themselves.
- A first or early impression can imprint on us. We may not have a grasp of what we see or observe, but nonetheless it leaves an impression.
- For example, if as a youngster, we tried to get an autograph from a player and instead we got attitude. This might lead us to a mistaken impression going forward that 'all' professional athletes as ultimately arrogant and self-centered.
- We have a misconception of our knowledge or experience.
- If we've never really faced a given circumstance before, while we may have understood intellectually, we never have really 'gotten it'.
- If we've never had to truly face hunger before, we might not get the level of desperation a person suffering from real hunger has.
- If we've never had to truly face depression, it sounds easy to tell a depressed person to seek help. But, we may not understand that a deep sense of shame or embarrassment combined with the negative energy of depression may make it nearly impossible for someone to proactively seek out help.
- We might have experience in a similar area/circumstance, but that doesn't mean we can apply it to a similar one.
- A person who is good at drawing and believe mistakenly that if we can draw well we would probably be a good painter. That is not necessarily a given.
- Treat each situation/person separately. (Guard against profiling)
- Just because a person/situation/circumstance reminds you of someone/something doesn't mean it is definitely so.
- Attempt to, if you have the opportunity, to seek out more information before you come to 'conclusion'. You may that you didn't have enough information to assess the person or situation correctly, when you were initially trying to assess.
- Look for context or understand you might not have context.
- Often times a circumstance or situation can by itself read one way. But, when you see the larger picture, it reads completely different.
- For example, you might see someone you run store might not say hi to you when you say hi to them. What you may not know is the person might have received horrible news and is distracted.
- Understand that while you may be knowledgeable and a good read of people, you don't 'know-it-all'.
- Sometimes, we may mistakenly think we have enough knowledge to make a value judgement of a person or circumstance.
- I used to have a less forgiving view of drug addicts until I realize a) what might drive someone to drugs, b) People don't always know that they are getting into, and c) kicking the habit may sound like a 'if-it is important enough to them' matter, but really it might be way beyond that.
- A late friend of mine struggled with heroine addiction. It ultimately led to an early grave for her. I realized along the line that she had likely been abused, that she hadn't started out on heroine, and less than 10% of heroine addicts avoid dying or going to prison. In other words, it isn't something that is easily kicked.
- If you are weakened emotionally along the way, it can make you more subject to getting addicted and not being able to kick it.
- Withdrawal is apparently so bad that the sweet lies of 'feeling better' and stopping 'next time' outweigh the physical and psychological torture associated with attempts to withdraw from it.
Ultimately, I helped one friend get off the bottle successfully. That gave me a false sense that I could do the same again with my other friend who was on heroine. Hubris got in my way.
There is nothing wrong with being confident in your intuition as often your gut feeling is right on the money. There is nothing wrong with feeling confidence in your abilities or knowledge. There is nothing wrong with forming an impression--after all we all have to live our lives based on knowledge and judgement of people and circumstances. The problem lies in an inability or willingness to move on from or be open to another read of a person or circumstance. If we are so used to something meaning one thing in our experience, we may miss that it could mean another. It may look and sound like a horse, but sometimes it is a zebra. Ultimately, we have to not like our biases and stubbornness get in the way of better judgment. In other words, 'getting out of our own way'. Easier said than done and no doubt that take a lot of practice for many people. But, the payoff can be great.
- We can gain a better understanding of someone or something.
- We can make better choices based our willingness to do so.
- We can develop greater and better relationships and friendship or in some cases avoid disastrous ones.
Friday, May 21, 2021
Controlling your life starts with controlling you

Had someone said control starts with you, I would have laughed at them. The idea of 'being in control' would have sounded utterly absurd to me. As previously mentioned, I didn't have control over what I could wear or what eat, the home in which I live in and its state of repair or disrepair. In my house, I didn't have control over the dysfunction--the yelling, the screaming, in some cases the domestic violence. On my person, I didn't have control over the sexual abuse that happened to me and the bullying in the neighborhood and at school. So, to me the idea to me that I controlled anything would have met with like a "yeah, right" type stare. Before I go on, I just want to state that I'm not focused on what I "didn't have" but am setting up a point. I do realize that I am still fortunate in some ways living in the wealthiest country in the world. But, I digress. I didn't realize it then, but I realize these days that in some ways I had much more control than I understood.
Let's move forward into my adulthood. I was always the 'peacemaker' which in some ways is another way of saying "approval seeker" or "people pleaser". I had started that role in my childhood and played that role in my adult life too. It didn't help that I developed a moderate to severe anxiety condition as a 17 year old and as such sought calm as a result. In any case, this desire for approval (or better yet to not be disliked) led me to not properly stand up for myself. I didn't stand up for myself as a kid and as a young adult I continued this pattern. In some ways, I let those closest to me continued to control me by using my need for approval and my need not to be disliked or unwanted. So, in some ways to me it felt like a progression from my childhood with the manipulation and being controlled that was part of needing acceptance.
--
Despite having the sense of 'powerlessness' in my early years and my earlier adulthood, I believe I gradually have awakened to a different view or perspective of control (or power). I used to be view power or control as:
- Something that is given or allowed.
- Something we have to grab aggressively to gain.
- Necessarily involve or interact with that which is outside out.
- That which we can implicitly gain or earn.
- That which we can find within ourselves.
- It isn't necessarily something we are given or allowed, but what we own.
- When someone in your life tries to control you, to a large degree the control over you is what you allow or tolerate from them.
- Control doesn't need to be something achieved via threats over others. It is best achieved or earned by doing the right things for the right reason and therefore gaining authority or power with that role.
- You can't control how people treat you, but you can control your response. You can influence your outcomes positively with control of yourself.
Sunday, April 11, 2021
Blind spots: Judging yesterday by today's standards
- What are some 'blind spots' we have in society?
- What causes or what is behind blind spots?
- Should we hold people responsible for unintentional blind spots? That is, should we hold people of yesterday to today's standards?
- Lack of exposure to people that are different than us.
- Unfortunately, sometimes you don't know what you don't know. My friend in college I'm sure she wasn't trying to be racist or anything. She just literally hadn't been exposed to so many blondes and as a result had a hard time distinguishing among them initially.
- When we don't know about "others" from personal experience we go by what we've heard about them or what we've seen in a limited, often bias, setting. If there is anything I understand about people is the need for some level of certainty. Sometimes, this leads to taking whatever we can have or 'think we know' to fill in the gaps. Unfortunately, often what we 'know' or 'figure' about others isn't necessarily consistent with reality.
- Those around us (or society) were not or seemed to not be fazed by that which bothers people today.
- In my case, I've heard men and sometimes even women talk about young adult women as 'girls'. So, for me it made it seem like it was okay. I've heard songs referred to an adult love interest as 'little girl' and little push back. To me, I thought that reference was 'cringeworthy' but not necessarily that big of a deal.
- Growing up, a married woman was often rereferred to as "Mrs. <husband's full name>. For example, if a woman's maiden name was Jane Thomas and her husband's name was John Smith, her married name be referred to as Mrs. John Smith as opposed to Mrs. Jane Smith or however she wanted herself referred to as. Today for much of society that seems dismissive of a married woman's individuality. But, back when I was growing up that was common and from what I could tell largely accepted.
- Growing up I heard what we call African American or black people referred to as colored people or the other 'n' word. But, growing up those references seemed common and heck two organizations are founded with those labels UNCF (United Negro College Fund) and NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). To older people--not of the demographic--who grew up with those labels being thrown around and even seemingly well accepted among the referenced group, referring to African American or black people as "Colored" or "Negro" was considered more normal and uncontroversial (at least from what I could tell). To most people today, not only do the labels seem dated, but degrading. However, back in the day they were more widely accepted.
- Those closest to us modelled bad behavior for us.
- If our parents and adults close to us privately--or not so privately--referred to a racial or ethnic group a certain way that wasn't necessarily complimentary, essentially they were condoning the slurs.
- If those around us made a sexist references often enough, we might not because numb to them. In other words, misogamy or misandry was normalized in such a way that we might not recognize it as such when we heard it.
- In our earliest, most formative years, we are literary are influenced the most. In other words, we are trained essentially to think and/or behave a certain way. Unfortunately for many, the 'training' is on poor thinking and/or behavior. Early training, especially if complemented by similar outside the home training, can be hard to easily overcome or as some say 'deprogram'.
- Biases are not always blatantly obvious.
- Some things in our society were blatantly wrong from the beginning, such as slavery and the mistreatment of those enslaved, but were tolerated for too long.
- Referring to African Americans as 'underprivileged' can seem like 'understanding the historical imbalances', but it can also unfairly stereotype many people who are doing just fine, thank you.
- Using the term 'model minority' for people of Asian descent can sound complimentary, but can be insulting. It obviously is insulting to those minorities who aren't of Asian descent. However, it can be dismissive of the individual differences within the group and hold people of that group to an unreasonably high standard.
- Did the person have anyone in their life that firmly stood up and/or provided a strong counterbalance to the thinking/behavior they were taught?
- It is hard to model behavior/thinking that you never see or have never been taught.
- A weak counterbalance may not be respected, but instead be seen as weakness.
- Was there a strong counter-movement to the prevailing wisdom?
- Sometimes prevailing wisdom is so pervasive that there is little space for any other thinking to occupy. I would imagine that this is an intentional feature of autocratic societies.
- Sometimes the counter-movement can be one person or just a few people if they have have a strong resolve and strong presence. Martin Luther took on the Catholic church. He was just one person, but he led a historical break from the Catholic church.
- If there was no good prevailing movement to prevailing wisdom, there maybe little for young people of good character to hold onto.
- Is there any context in which the behavior or thinking can be seen as anything other than breaking the golden rule?
- Luke 6:31 says, "And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them and the Declaration of Independence tell us "All men are created equal..."
- Most people, even back then I imagine would not have wanted to be slaves or to been treated as second class citizens.
- So, the idea that slavery or Jim Crow could not be understood to be unfair or unjust, even back then, is seemingly ridiculous.
- Is there a possibility of an innocent misunderstanding?
- Sometimes slights are tolerated by others for so long and seemingly accepted or "approved". This can lead to the idea that the slight isn't really a slight, but showing appreciation or acceptance.
- In reality such slights are often overlooked by those not wanting to be accepted, those that are too polite to say otherwise and/or those not wanting to rock the boat.
- Was the person in question ever subjected to an alternative point of view and how did they take it? Do they seem contrite about their 'stinking' thinking/behavior of yesteryear.
- If your upbringing leads to unintentional insensitivity, but you attempt to correct the poor behavior when you are made aware of the offensive nature to it, there will tend to be a lot more forgiveness.
- When you continue the poor behavior even after it has been reinforced that behavior could be considered offensive, you are all but begging to be judged.
- Objectively, if subjected to the same societal forces of the one we are judging, how would we respond?
- Can we honestly say that we'd have been the 'voice of wisdom' in a sea of well established and protected ignorance?
- It is easy to champion a cause today when it is widely accepted or blessed. However, would you have championed the same cause when there was a cost to do so and doing so wasn't as widely popular?
- Does the person(s) seem contrite about their immature thinking or behavior of their youth in yesteryear? Are they attempting to atone for it?
- If they have worked make adjustments to said thinking or behavior, it is easier not to condemn then in perpetuity.
- People, especially those exposed to widespread ignorance in their youth, can do and say ignorant things. The measure of a person can often be seen in how they mature.
- This is not to condone or remove all consequences for youthful ignorance, but to allow that people can grow and change and to factor that in when judging it. In fact, some of the worst 'sinners' can become 'saints' over time.
- Does the person in question attempt to make excuses for our justify their poor behavior yesteryear?
- If so, it would appear they that they are more interested in their reputation than of how they treat others.
- Sometimes the best thing to do is to own your ignorance and poor behavior of yesteryear rather than fight to explain it away.
Sunday, March 7, 2021
How inconsiderate!: 2D vs. 3D relationships revisited.
If you had a friend like that and he was throwing you a birthday party, he'd run it in a way that he thought was cool. That is, it would be more important that he do something he'd like and tell himself that he'd know you like it, than to actually find out what is truly important to you. He'd be the type that would contribute to a cause you had, but only if it was in a way that he found appropriate rather than the most helpful way. He'd be the type that would watch you dog, walk him, medicate him and feed him, but only in the manner (or timing) that he thought was appropriate or comfortable with him, not in the manner closer to which the dog is most comfortable with. He'd pat himself on the back for 'taking good care of Rover', when his 'help' confused Rover and threw Rover off his schedule. Sometimes you are just so grateful for the help that you overlook the self-centered nature of other's 'consideration'. However, in a romantic relationship (or other close relationship) that can be a problem. Considering others on your terms is NOT a building block of a healthy relationship. You might pick out a gift which you think is really neat and your spouse will thank you but not use--a sign of not knowing him or her (or not being willing to consider clues they've given). When that disconnect seems to be the rule rather then the exception, it leads to what I call a 2D relationship. That is your significant other knows things about you, but don't really know you (or accept you for who you are). I contrast that with what I call a 3D relationship, where they know things about you, but they ultimately know what really makes you tick or what is important to you AND accept you for it.
When asked what are the building blocks of a good relationship, people. According to Psychology Today by Abigail Brenner M.D. (April 26, 2017), the following are the building blocks of a good relationship:
- Trust
- Commitment
- Intimacy
- Respect
- Communication
- Empathy
- Equity
- You work to know the other person and what is important to them.
- You ask questions, observe and listen to them, not just hear them.
- You focus on what they indicate is important to them.
- You don't just listen for a few keywords, but you listen to their thoughts, especially in context..
- Your helpful or thoughtful actions are done optimally because you really want to and with a cheerful demeanor.
- In other words, showing consideration/being helpful for others brings you a level of satisfaction.
- Even when you really don't feel like being particularly thoughtful or helpful, you do it anyway.
- The person is important to you and you know it is just the right thing to do.
- You don't make or base your decisions to 'show consideration' based on what you figure you'll get out of the equation.
- You don't look for praise by your significant other or outside praise. In other words, you are looking to show everyone or make a case what a considerate person you are.
- You don't look for "advantage" to be gained by 'showing consideration''. In other words, you don't cynically look at consideration as to what can I get out of this later.
- You may even 'hide' consideration.
- You just do considerate things without being asked or saying anything. In other words, it just seems like a nice thing to do and your heart just wants to do nice things.
- If help or consideration is 'discovered', you may minimize or dismiss it.
- It could be out of being shy or embarrassment of positive attention that way. Some people just don't like to be the center of attention.
- If could be because your faith or code encourages you not to brag on yourself. As I understand my faith (Christianity), I shouldn't seek out praise of others.
- Your focus is often more on what YOU think is appropriate for other person, rather that what is important to them.
- This shows it is all about what YOU and your hubris as it relates to others.
- When 'showing consideration', you only show consideration in a way that is comfortable to you.
- That shows it is more about what is easiest or best for you, rather than what is the most helpful for others.
- That shows that you are trying to 'control the terms' of helpfulness or consideration.
- When 'showing consideration', you calculate what will get the most positive feedback and positive attention.
- You are trying to impress everyone and put on a 'good presentation' for everyone.
- Really this is trying to control what others think about you.
- When 'showing consideration', your motive is doing so to gain advantage or even control.
- 'Consideration' may be withheld when you determine there is little advantage or more disadvantage than advantage. In other words, what's in it for me.
- Conversely, consideration may be shown when there is enough advantage for you.
- Help or 'thoughtfulness' is contingent on returning favors or you gaining a tactical advantage. Help or consideration is only offered if you get something out of it.
- Trust - Our actions and words are undertaken with consideration as to what would help to build trust in a relationship, where applicable.
- Commitment - This takes a lifetime of true consideration towards your other. You are considerate toward the other and the relationship in general.
- Intimacy - Consideration in intimacy is the willingness to bare your soul or allow your other to be their soul, even if it is not always comfortable. In other words, when we are willing to allow ourselves to be vulnerable, we are considering the other person as we are giving them the chance to know us and permission for them to do the same. We are appreciating their needs that way.
- Respect - True consideration in a relationship implies respect for our other. We are regarding their other person to be an equal partner to us. We would hold deep regard for them and what is important for them. Obviously, a relationship works best if they hold the same.
- Communication - This can be challenging. Being considerate with communication means you are willing to let the other express what is important to them w/o cutting them off and truly listening to them, not just hearing them. It also can mean considerate enough to show restraint in expressing yourself where it could be harmful or showing a willingness to have express yourself to, especially where it could be helpful.
- Empathy - If you are stepping in your other's shoes to try to empathize with them, you are clearly considering them.
- Equity - To be fair and just with your other, you have to take into account what is important to them. That is, what what they might see as fairness. You cannot just decide what is equitable in the relationship and then impose it on the relationship.
Saturday, February 20, 2021
Facing Reality and Arizona
Why and when we don't speak up?
- We are afraid of consequences.
- Fear of consequences to us and those close to us.
- Sometimes we fear consequences to our everyday life.
- For example, we are aware of corruption at the highest levels in our place of employment, we may fear retaliation--such as job loss--if we speak out.
- For example, if we speak out against problems in our child's school district, we might fear doing so puts a target on their back.
- For example, if we point out corruption in our place of worship we risk being shunned by the church.
- Sometimes we fear consequences to the safety.
- For example, if we witness a murder or embezzlement, we might fear harm if we agree to cooperate with law enforcement investigating it.
- For example, in Nazi Germany those who spoke out of turn about the Third Reich were at risk of never being heard from again.
- Fear of consequences to society as a whole.
- There has long been speculation about the 'truth' behind the assassination of JFK. There has been speculation that the government either knew more about it than they admitted and/or were more involved than they admitted. The unspoken fear is that if the 'public knew what really happened', it would undermine our government as an institution. At least that's the theory about it.
- In other words, the 'truth' is just too damning for us handle as a society. In other words, as a society we are not "ready" to handle certain truths.
- We are too entangled.
- Are we compromised? Are we corrupt as well?
- It would stand to reason that a politician on the take would be less likely to out others on the take, especially if they felt their corruption was 'known'.
- Are we entangled with one who is compromised or corrupt.
- We are likely to be silent about corruption, for example, if a friend or loved one is in the middle of it.
- We could have a bias to protect the person or persons.
- We don't know how to or where to start
- Sometimes a problem or wrong is so huge in scope that we aren't sure where to start.
- Sometimes we just don't have the words to express what we know to be true.
- Much of the public doubts the official version of the JFK killing and what followed (Lee Harvey Oswald's killing). While there are a number of alternative theories to what REALLY happened, there are many people who doubt the official version because it just seems to convenient or similar. They can't say for sure what happened, but they KNOW that the official version just sounds a bit to nicely wrapped up.
- We don't have 'all the evidence', despite it being blatantly obvious the problem exists.
- We have a good circumstantial case, but we don't have the 'body' or 'smoking gun'. This is the case when law enforcement has a good working theory on a crime but doesn't indict or go public until they have concrete evidence/irrefutable proof.
- The scope of the problem is not fully evident yet. For example, an auto manufacture may hold off an an official recall until they get their arms around the extent of a defect or flaw.
- We are in denial of the scope of the problem.
- In numerous high school shootings, the perpetrators were known to be students and staff as 'problem children', but for whatever reason no one stepped up and took decisive action to avoid a tragedy.
- People sometimes behave as if they ignore a big enough problem it will just 'go away by itself'.
- We have decided it is not the right hill to die on or not the right time.
- When I was a teen, my dad gave me lunch money for school. Sometimes I packed a lunch and just pocketed the money. It wasn't the most honest behavior and I found out later my dad figured it out. However, the matter apparently wasn't important enough in the big scheme of things for him to address as I did help him a lot.
- How do we address an issue.
- Do we address it directly?
- Do we put all our cards on the table, acknowledging the extent of the problem?
- Doing so could make others defensive or alienate them.
- Doing so could put us in an awkward position of being forced to make a difficult choice or decision (especially if we are not prepared to do so)?
- For example, if a relationship is broken addressing the brokenness directly could build pressure for us to get out of it from those around us.
- Dong so could also kick the 900lb. gorilla out the room and allow us a fresh start as a family, group, or society rather than a wound that continues to slowly bleed out.
- How can we even remotely hope to heal a relationship, for example, without addressing what is actually broken in it.
- Do we address it indirectly?
- Do we tacitly acknowledge a problem without speaking directly to it or fully to it?
- Doing so gives could give people room to address the problem and save face.
- In court, this looks like a 'no-contest' plea.
- In international diplomacy, it may look like a quiet solution to a crisis.
- In a relationship, this could look like a plea for individual counseling.
- Doing so could allow us the space to work out a solution. An unspoken understanding of an issue could also lead to an unspoken solution, where a problem is addressed quietly without a public outing of the problem and the pressure that brings.
- When the St. Louis Cardinals traded Keith Hernandez they wanted to get rid of a popular player with drug problems, but they didn't want to publicly humiliate him.
- They orchestrated an unpopular trade to get rid of the problem from the St. Louis clubhouse.
- Had they outed him as drug addict beforehand that could have caused a bigger disruption in the clubhouse and would have forced them to get rid of him under more pressure.
- Doing so could unfortunately can sometimes give the problem more space to fester.
- Sometimes problems need to be fully out in the open before real solutions can be undertaken.
- For example, quietly or indirectly addressing a problem with a loved one about their drinking, might get an acknowledgement and a commitment to do better. However, if it is out of control it might offer them the space to ignore you. An intervention might be necessary to force them to face their issues.
- As a society, it is best to be as transparent as possible about problems we face. However, not everything that can be said has to be said. Sometimes doing so could be more harmful than good, esp. when dealing with those who don't have our best interests in mind.
- There are sometimes legitimate reasons for delaying transparency--such as preparing people to deal with bad news. However, sometimes we avoid transparency for selfish reasons such as not wanting to expose our role in a problem or issue.
- We can quietly acknowledge issues or problems to allow people/society space to work on them. However, quiet acknowledgement should not be used as a means of avoiding dealing with them.