Sunday, May 01, 2005


Reading around here, I get the impression nearly everyone's pretty honest and though it can't always be picked up easily, I haven't spotted anyone who appears to be making anything up. I don't really know why either, as if you are a creative writer you don't need a blog, just use a normal website. Blogs are diaries, and diaries are records of facts. I've been accused of lying here a few times, surprisingly from people who had no way of knowing, plus my life is reflected here as accurately as I can, whether interesting or dull. And half my blog is philosophy anyway, which is only my thoughts on the facts I've just written.

The reason I write about honesty now is I've reached a moment in time where fantasy would be an improvement here, as anything I do recall in this window of peace would only repeat more or less the last 2 weeks. It's not anyone's fault, life just gets its heavy boots on sometimes and holds you back. So I feel like writing anything new here is such a challenge, and as there's nothing on TV and too early to go to bed, I'll try a Neale Donald Walsch or Ruth Montgomery style conversation with God, where you just let things flow from a higher source. Short of that, I may just have to make the effort myself, but the opportunity is there for 'above'.

Currently things are apparently frozen, the efforts I make towards my own progress seem to have stayed put for some time, and the law of inertia states things are always more likely to stay the same than change. In fact the good things all seem to dry up sooner or later though many bad ones do stay for ages. But technically if no outside force or personal effort intervenes, I'll be in the same situation more or less for life. I was just having a conversation with Indie Queen who is one of the rare women who isn't offended by a man asking directly if she'd like sex. If only she could go on a world lecture tour, as I said my current target, like most beforehand, may prefer a few hot dates and be seduced in the traditional way should she wish to be. If they could see it is possible to accept a man without being publicly stoned mens' lives would be made vastly less stressful. In this case I may be wrong, but would be so worried about mucking it up I may not risk even a relatively direct approach. Most women just don't appreciate it, however much they may fancy a man, they want the 'full traditional treatment' before letting the man know by her response (not her own approaches to him, except maybe once in ten years, that she's interested). Fine for teens and twenties maybe, but not for adults. They should have used up the romantic stuff by now and be ready to get down to a decision without all the frills and seduction. We just don't have the time after 40.

Anyway, back to honesty, I actually disclose far more than most as I believe I have little to hide, and have literally no benefit from inventing or changing anything about my life here or anywhere else. Why the hell would I? I even had to cut out a load of bits from earlier posts as I realised certain people could take my disclosures and make more of them than was necessary, so I couldn't risk it. Lying is not keeping privacy, as one person was confusing. So by laying down the rules I play by here I hope it'll put an end to the few accusations I've had of dishonesty. At 45 I know all my faults, like laziness, elitism, anxiety, impatience, absent minded, and probably some more on top. But my parents and carers taught me well from early childhood. I've never been dishonest. Technically I could prove it's unnecessary if I had the time, and the only time I can possibly think of where it may be useful is recognised in many legal systems as the right not to self-incriminate. That's a fairly universal principle that your accuser has to prove you did something without the need for you to admit it. I see that as the far end of privacy though by keeping silent to an accusation you could be close to denying the truth. But the plea of not guilty means in practice 'You must prove me guilty' rather than 'I didn't do it'. The rare situation in Scotland has a 'Not proven' verdict, meaning there wasn't enough evidence but we bet you did it. I think it still has the same result of not guilty, but probably a few technicalities as well.

So, apart from silence under accusation (though anything I'd be accused of would be no more than quite embarrassing, rather than criminal), I see no possible situation that would need dishonesty. Silence in response to questions and privacy by non-disclosure, yes, but actually initiating a dishonest line, never. I hope I've put my case clearly, as anyone calling me a liar is simply unaware of the truth and trying to pull me down for their own reasons. I mind my own business and live and let live, as do most on the net, but there are always a few who have to get involved and judge others even though they hardly know them.

I rarely need to justify myself anymore, but if I'm forced to by people with agendas, I'll always do so, though I know most such people are driven my emotions and have little interest in the actual truth, so will not take much notice anyway.

1 comment:

Stef said...


It's quite a hot topic these days isn't it?

I'd suggest that most people would like to THINK that they are honest but that's not the same thing a being honest.

The number of true, hardcore liars I've met in life is quite small. The number of people I've met who fool themselves and engage in dissonant behaviour is alarmingly high.

Look at good ol' Tony Blair. Is he lying? Or has he convinced himself that the things he says are actually true?

Answer b) seems the most likely.

I reckon that most of us are hard-wired to delude ourselves most of the time. The Truth may be a beautiful thing but it is also very often a very scary thing