S/O Declaring the death of a friendship

[Rosie_0801]

I've cut off a friendship with the same person twice. First time, they were being a pratt, but they came, explained themselves and made up. The second time I thought I was doing the right thing in a rather delicate situation, but my head reorganised itself so I had to go apologise for being a pratt and thankfully, their sense of delicacy wasn't in the same place as mine so we could be friends again. It seems we're friends even when we're not friends, so whatever mess we might make, we trust we'll find our way back together again.

[Shoeless]

I feel like I"m being misunderstood in this thread.  I'm not dismissing friendships based on minor differences in opinion.

I have a lot of friends that swear that alkaline water will fix all sorts of health problems. I think this is nonsense and lacks scientific backing, but it doesn't hurt them, so they drink their expensive "magic" water and I drink my cheap "toxic" tap water, and we're all good.  Their different opinion does not harm me or anyone else.

Some of these friends also are big fans of CBD oil and are casual pot users. They swear up and down that cbd and mary jane will fix every problem under the sun. My response is that I"m sure it feels like the problems have improved, because that's kind of what pot does, lol. I don't think it's really going to hurt my friends or anyone else, (provided they don't drive while partaking).  It's not going to hurt me because I'm not taking CBD oil or smoking pot, so I can shrug and move on. 

I have another friend that believes in ghosts and swears that "orbs" visit her at night.  I listened to her story about "orbs" and she said "You think I'm nuts, right?" and I said "Well, a little. You know it's just dust reflecting in the camera lens, right?" It's nonsense, but it hurts no one. 

But when the same people start yelling about tyranny because they have to wear a face mask at Target, or starting angry social media campaigns to elected officials about why all vaccines should be made illegal and making a lot of noise about a potential COVID-19 vax being "the mark of the beast", I'm not sure I can ignore that. It moves from "My friend Susie is little eccentric but very fun" to "Susie thinks elected officials should prevent me from receiving a vaccine that could potentially save the life of myself and my family, because she thinks it's better if we all die 'pure' rather than live 'tainted'".  (Yes, this was a quote from someone)

The last point is a deal breaker for me right now.  

Edited April 23, 2020 by MissLemon

[Soror]

17 hours ago, OKBud said:

Associating with and standing in friendship with are two different things. Surely. 

 

17 hours ago, Quill said:

I think this is what’s not making sense to me when posters are saying they don’t stop friendships even if beliefs are repugnant. I have associated with people who hold beliefs I find repugnant. But they aren’t my friends or even my “friends” on FB. 

Ya, I think we have different definitions of the word friend. Most people on my FB friend list aren't friends, they are acquaintances. My actual friends list is pretty small. Now, I have plenty of differences with my actual friends and acquaintances but I choose to keep a distance with people who are obnoxious with their views and feel the need to denigrate/call names/ belittle people with other view points. I am hardly on now but even before I had to unfollow most of my family because of their obnoxious postings, otherwise I'd have a hard time enjoying family get togethers. Social media seems to make people forget that there are real people on the other side of the aisle and people say things they would never say in real life. People can do whatever they want online but I'm not going to bff's with people that are hateful.

And I agree it is crap to ghost someone that has been a close friend I've got no qualms with backing away from someone who has been a jerk to me without discussion. And if they jump the shark and our views really pull far apart I'm not engaging in a discussion with them, not worth my time or theirs.

[HS Mom in NC]

On 4/23/2020 at 10:57 AM, Quill said:

Hmm. Ok. I have a different view of humanity. I believe, as a social species, people who aren’t sociopaths (ie., most people) behave largely according to the consensus of what is normal and desirable for their culture and/or sub-culture. So, in this case, most people in the store are wearing some kind of mask or face covering because they believe, to some degree, it is either a) necessary due to the virus, b) required by authorities or c) both. Tie-ranny guy is refusing to conform with this request. I’m willing to bet he has some group - friends, people on the internet, Alex Jones, whatever - who are refusing to wear masks because they are rebelling against this new rule that they believe is a) unnecessary, b) an abuse of authority, or c) both. 

If I could go back in time one day and re-do this event at the store, I might ask the man why he wears shoes. Maybe he could consider that he already, currently is conforming to a wide variety of arbitrary rules and social conventions either because it is legally required, because it is socially normal, or both. 

ETA: I said “this case” forgetting that the “Tie-ranny” guy was in the Target facemask thread. So that is what I was referring to.

 

I'll repeat myself and say again that the history of the 20th century alone is evidence very typical people who are not sociopaths from highly "civilized" societies are capable of tolerating and participating in evils of all kinds in certain circumstances. Even when consensus exists, it's fragile and subject to quick change.

I think people should be wearing facemasks and social distancing too, but I live in a world where people have very different views and attitudes about scientific, governmental, and moral authority. There is not consensus on this matter related to those things, neither is there consensus on how much risk to self and others is worth tolerating.  It's fantasy to believe there's consensus on this or many other things.  We are a nation of widely different subcultures and a huge population that gives lip service to diversity.  It seems to me that believing there is or could be consensus is often a symptom of living in an echo chamber or maybe an unwillingness to look at cold, hard reality because it's too hard to deal with. I dunno, maybe there's another explanation I haven't thought of, but I don't think normal observational skills of someone living in the US can result in expecting overwhelming conformity on issues like this. Those of us who don't live in an echo chamber are well aware that the consensus doesn't exist because every day on our FB feeds we see completely different reactions to the same information. We see that credibility on topics related to COVID vary widely. 

I just follow the advice of epidemiologists who know the most about the spreading of disease.  What else can I do? Choosing to be upset about things I can't control is choosing to be upset continuously. That isn't making life better for anyone, it makes it worse.  Human beings are FAMOUS for not doing things they know are good for them and for doing things they know are bad for them. I can't change that element of human nature, so I wouldn't bother saying anything to people I see in stores not wearing masks, not wearing masks properly, and/or not social distancing. I'm not going to tell them anything they haven't heard before.  I'm not special, they aren't going to choose to suddenly listen to me.  They have reject solid, reasonable, good advice about precautions from people far more knowledgeable than me.

Choosing to only expose myself to people who agree with me on this or other issues isn't going to make me better at living in the world. Adaptability is focusing on the things I can control and doing the best I can under those circumstances and trusting God with life and/or my soul if the illness come to me.

[HS Mom in NC]

21 hours ago, Quill said:

I think this is what’s not making sense to me when posters are saying they don’t stop friendships even if beliefs are repugnant. I have associated with people who hold beliefs I find repugnant. But they aren’t my friends or even my “friends” on FB. 

I suspect a couple of different things are factoring in:

1. Personality

Someone with a higher emotional need to be agreed with and who is emotionally uncomfortable with disagreement from others and who values conformity more than individuality probably finds this stand more confusing.  They also tend to be generally conflict avoidant.

People who genuinely don't care about others openly or silently disagreeing with them or approving of them and valuing individuality more than conformity are probably find it less confusing. They tend to be generally less conflict avoidant.

2. Defining the term friend

For some people it's one or two categories with very specific criteria and anyone not fitting those doesn't get labeled friend.

For other people the term friend is defined by an array of categories and criteria.

So once again this a post at the Well Trained Mind Forums that can be boiled down to: people are different.

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, Homeschool Mom in AZ said:

I suspect a couple of different things are factoring in:

1. Personality

Someone with a higher emotional need to be agreed with and who is emotionally uncomfortable with disagreement from others and who values conformity more than individuality probably finds this stand more confusing.  They also tend to be generally conflict avoidant.

People who genuinely don't care about others openly or silently disagreeing with them or approving of them and valuing individuality more than conformity are probably find it less confusing. They tend to be generally less conflict avoidant.

2. Defining the term friend

For some people it's one or two categories with very specific criteria and anyone not fitting those doesn't get labeled friend.

For other people the term friend is defined by an array of categories and criteria.

So once again this a post at the Well Trained Mind Forums that can be boiled down to: people are different.

Well, I guess that explains it, then. I find conflict kills my affection for someone, if it’s chronic and/or we don’t have a good bit of other areas of agreement. To me, there’s just no basis for me to be friends if the person forcefully believes things that I reject. I wouldn’t be friends with someone who drowned their kids in the bathtub and therefore, if I believed abortion was literally murdering one’s children, I could not be friends with someone who would announce they have aborted and it was a choice they were glad to have made. (I don’t have this view of abortion, but if I did, the need to be consistent would make it impossible for me to be friends with that person.) Acquaintances - sure. I have many acquaintances IRL or on FB who think/support/believe things I don’t. It doesn’t affect my life; we can carry on. 

[importswim]

3 hours ago, Homeschool Mom in AZ said:

I suspect a couple of different things are factoring in:

1. Personality

Someone with a higher emotional need to be agreed with and who is emotionally uncomfortable with disagreement from others and who values conformity more than individuality probably finds this stand more confusing.  They also tend to be generally conflict avoidant.

People who genuinely don't care about others openly or silently disagreeing with them or approving of them and valuing individuality more than conformity are probably find it less confusing. They tend to be generally less conflict avoidant.

2. Defining the term friend

For some people it's one or two categories with very specific criteria and anyone not fitting those doesn't get labeled friend.

For other people the term friend is defined by an array of categories and criteria.

So once again this a post at the Well Trained Mind Forums that can be boiled down to: people are different.

This whole post was very helpful to me. I'm the higher emotional need person and that is a good thing to know vs. friends who are just different. Thank you so much for writing it.