Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
oh please. I didn't say testing them. I said checking to verify what all they tell you on a regular basis. Sorry but I don't beleive everything a person tells me. If you do simply b/c that's your partner, then so be it. .
Man.
What has happened to the world?
Trust but verify?
That's what you do to a teenager. Or a NATO counterpart.
I have a few questions for these relationship peoples on here.....Do any of you think it's possible to have a relationship where the people don't trust each other 100 percent and it not end up badly? Is 100 percent trust necessary and the end all be all? Why do so many of these people think they have to throw all caution to the wind in these so called 'love' situations in order for it to work? Why is being foolhardy a requirement for relationships?
Answer one, all or none. ty
Trust is developed over time by being with someone who is trustworthy. Foolhardy is not the opposite of trust.
oh please. I didn't say testing them. I said checking to verify what all they tell you on a regular basis. Sorry but I don't beleive everything a person tells me. If you do simply b/c that's your partner, then so be it. Again, if you don't beleive there are shades and degrees that's you, not me.
Yep, so be it. I've had many romantic relationships in my life, I know how things work, and it IS all or nothing. You don't fragment all the components of a relationship and assign a trust level to each one. If you can't trust your partner in one aspect of the relationship, that permeates the whole relationship.
A person is either trustworthy, or they aren't. A healthy relationship is built on full trust, not partial.
Yep, so be it. I've had many romantic relationships in my life, I know how things work, and it IS all or nothing. You don't fragment all the components of a relationship and assign a trust level to each one. If you can't trust your partner in one aspect of the relationship, that permeates the whole relationship.
A person is either trustworthy, or they aren't. A healthy relationship is built on full trust, not partial.
I think they may also be expressing it backwards.
No, you don't trust someone 100% because they are your partner.
They are your partner because you trust them 100%.
Yep, so be it. I've had many romantic relationships in my life, I know how things work, and it IS all or nothing. You don't fragment all the components of a relationship and assign a trust level to each one. If you can't trust your partner in one aspect of the relationship, that permeates the whole relationship.
A person is either trustworthy, or they aren't. A healthy relationship is built on full trust, not partial.
Well what is meant by full trust? I can trust my husband to love me, be there for me, have me as his highest priority in the world. I cannot trust him to remember to do something that he has said he would do. It just is not him. I can trust him to try really hard to work on organizational skills that overcome such an issue...
Well what is meant by full trust? I can trust my husband to love me, be there for me, have me as his highest priority in the world. I cannot trust him to remember to do something that he has said he would do. It just is not him. I can trust him to try really hard to work on organizational skills that overcome such an issue...
That is what was not clearly delineated in the op.
We asked for clarification and got none.
I have a few questions for these relationship peoples on here.....Do any of you think it's possible to have a relationship where the people don't trust each other 100 percent and it not end up badly? Is 100 percent trust necessary and the end all be all? Why do so many of these people think they have to throw all caution to the wind in these so called 'love' situations in order for it to work? Why is being foolhardy a requirement for relationships?
I think it's possible yes, certainly not going to be an easy marriage but i'd say yes it is possible but highly undesirable. As for the being foolhardy well, I can't really answer that.... the things we do when in love and searching for love aren't always exactly logical I suppose...
Well what is meant by full trust? I can trust my husband to love me, be there for me, have me as his highest priority in the world. I cannot trust him to remember to do something that he has said he would do. It just is not him. I can trust him to try really hard to work on organizational skills that overcome such an issue...
I agree here. There are actually a few things I don't trust my husband with...like laundry (learned the hard way), completing tasks when he promises it will be done by a specific date, and honestly, I don't trust him to make medical decisions for me.
Well what is meant by full trust? I can trust my husband to love me, be there for me, have me as his highest priority in the world. I cannot trust him to remember to do something that he has said he would do. It just is not him. I can trust him to try really hard to work on organizational skills that overcome such an issue...
IMO, that's an example of a different definition of trust. It's not betraying your marriage that he has lousy organizational skills or a bad memory. Would you really call him untrustworthy because he's forgetful and you both know it?
IMO, that's an example of a different definition of trust. It's not betraying your marriage that he has lousy organizational skills or a bad memory. Would you really call him untrustworthy because he's forgetful and you both know it?
Nope! That was largely my point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.