Jump to content

Recommended Posts

felt-tip Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> a little white lie never hurt anybody.

>

> "You look great in that outfit."

> "Of course I still love you and the kids."

> "I was with Dave all night. I have never even

> heard of a Teresa."


...until the truth comes out...and it usually does...


No, I haven't seen the film Sean.

LOL Mick Mac!


Seriously though, I am often told that I am too honest. In reality, it is my guess that what the other person really means is that I am rude or tactless (or worse)! It's never really bothered me - until now. Life has also shown me that recipients of the truth are often ill-equipped to deal with it. Sure, hearing the truth can hurt - but the dispensing of it can be equally emotionally trying. However, to not give it, eats away at the conscience - I find. This destructive negative outweighs any purported positive in telling the lie in the first instance - in my experience.

If your experiences are that people are ill-equipped to deal with your version of the truth then why do you dispense it so freely - especially when your version of the truth is not necessarily the actual truth?


Do your truth-dispensing crusades hint at an inability to confront your own insecurities? To put on to other people 'hard truths' to deal with so that you don't have to address your own?

giggirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lady M - what's happened - give an example.


Oh blimey GG...no need to worry...I'm just having one of those deeply pensive moments LOL. And I'm stuck!


But take for example felt-tip's example above:


> a little white lie never hurt anybody.

>

> "You look great in that outfit."


Well, why say something like that if you don't mean it? Perhaps you want an easy life, perhaps you fear hurting that person's feelings? But surely, if your friend (or whoever) invites honest opinion, then shouldn't you respect that request and give it?

Basically LadyM, yes, be honest if someone invites your honest opinion, but what leaglebeagle said a few hours ago:


Honest whenever you can with a big dose of tactful?


I wouldn't tell someone they looked great in an outfit if that wasn't true, but I wouldn't want to send them away feeling negative about it. I'd just remind them how fabulous they looked in another outfit. I'd go all Gok on their ass. Oh, and I don't give unsolicited opinions - someone would need to ask first.


Obviously some situations are more serious than that. It's not only hurt feelings that you need to be careful to avoid, as you said above "Life has also shown me that recipients of the truth are often ill-equipped to deal with it". Very wise Lady M. I think in any situation I want to tell the truth but would try very hard to point someone in a positive direction if possible.

I have no idea if the following story is true but I hope it is. I heard it years ago and I think it's a lovely story so I just googled it. It's about Jimmy Carter's mother, who sounds like a real honey.


Miss Lillian was aware of her son's reputation for honesty, which had become a topic of curiosity among many politicians and even reporters. During a 1986 speech at the University of Tennessee, Jody Powell told a story about a television reporter who grilled Miss Lillian on this topic. "Is it true," asked the reporter, "that your son doesn't lie? Can you tell me he has never told a lie?"


"Well, I reckon he might have told a little white lie now and then," replied Miss Lillian.


The reporter spotted the opening. "I thought you said he didn't lie!" she exclaimed. "Are you telling me that white lies aren't as bad as black lies? Just what do you mean by a white lie?"


"Well," drawled Miss Lillian, "do you remember when you came in this morning and I told you how nice you looked and how glad I was to see you...?"

Well Lady M, a porky is always a porky. If you know what the truth is as an absolute fact then firstly examine your own motives in passing on this information. Sometimes ignorance really is bliss. If you really must pass this on to other interested parties then be responsible; try very hard not to hurt feelings or do any damage. The best of intentions are sometimes not always enough.


Pxx

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...