quote:

ORIGINAL: littleladybug

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

That doesn't make sense to me. What it sounds like you are saying is that you prefer to be miserable.... but that cant be right.... Happiness is not that complicated, you are either happy or you aren't. What makes someone happy means different things to different people but happiness is the goal... im trying to find another way to explain this...

Oh no, that's not at all what I'm saying. I don't prefer to be miserable at all. It's just that in my life there will be times when I'm not jumping up and saying "let's do it" with a smile on my face. And I'm with someone who doesn't expect that of me.

Taking the moving scenario that I mentioned before-- yup, this weekend is gonna suck. Me smiling and being positive about it will not change that fact. Me smiling and being positive about it won't make it better. We will move this furniture, because it will get us to the goal that we both want, but sure as hell, neither one of us will be smiling when we are trying to figure out how to get the couch up the porch steps and through the front door.

I don't see the absence of happiness in a particular situation as misery. Yes, there are people who feed off of negative drama, but there's a lot of in between here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

Happy is synonymous with good, if you are sad it means something is wrong and you have to try to fix it. Saying good is bad and bad is good makes no sense to me. If you dont want to be happy what do you want?

Do you not see ANY grey at all here?

Do you not see that there will be times, in getting to the "happiness goal" that will be not-so-smile-worthy? Or, will a smile just make it all better?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
There is no evil plot to replace you with a happy robot, when people want you to be happy it isnt secret code for them trying to destroy you... people can want to help other people. They want to help other people feel good because it makes them feel good. Simple really.

Again, I will say that if you feel that you need to be happy because your D-type has given that rule, more power to you. I believe that, in my life, it's not realistic, in any way, shape or form.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RemoteUser

Ahh, I might have misunderstood who you were replying to. your last response makes much more sense. Apologies if that is the case.

I didn't get the impression that anyone thinks making another person happy is wrong. The methods you use to try and engender happiness, though, may be suspect and subjected to scrutiny. Are you making someone happy primarily for them, or for gratification, for example.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrankAr

They should just plug you into that energiser bunny in the commercial and let him get a run for his money.

Frank Ar.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit


I love moving :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
Thats a very small part of a bigger picture. He wants to be with someone he can make happy, I want to be with someone I can make happy. If we couldnt make each other happy we would find people we could. If I wasnt happy he would try to fix it, if he wasnt happy id try to fix it. Nope, no middle ground on that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
If I was nuetral he would know something was really wrong, that doesn't mean you are smiling 100% of the time. It means you are happy, if you aren't you try to fix it. Neutral is just stagnation to me... like zombie mode.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
There are always going to be things that could be considered problems.... they dont get to me, I dont get stressed, I dont "not want to do things" I love doing things, someone asks me to do yardwork or fix their plumbing or pull papers for an audit im all over that, I run out of things to do too fast so I dont have those "ugh I dont want to do this feelings"(unless im around my mother or people like her that stand over your shoulder and nitpick everything). I am happy no matter what im doing. Default is happy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
Nobody will follow you based on prior communication and I'll tell you why; lots of people can talk the talk but not be capable when it comes to walking the walk. I could entice someone's submission with my initial communication but its only my actions, my consistency, my tolerance or lack of tolerance levels and my leadership ability that proves anything. In other words, could I deliver what I had communicated? or would I get all wishy washy at the first hurdle? A submissive, at least in a fledgling relationship will continuously look for clues. Is she really dominant? does she inspire me enough to submit to me? or is she just playing a game that she will tire of soon? The giving of submission is based on trust, not trust that you are safe but trust that you have real ability to consistently lead her. If they are going to invest in you then they will be testing you, even if you aren't aware you are being tested.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
Which is why I define manipulation as devious, working against someones end goal. Because for me there is always a choice towards some direction...

quote:

ORIGINAL: RemoteUser
I know what you mean. Going only off the definition posited, it is quite possible to consider manipulation for someone else's benefit, also to your own, relevant to your investment in the person and your shared outlook. The methodology doesn't dictate the result, as nice as it would be to think so, only what we believe will happen (which is only as accurate as the person's perceptions).

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

quote:

conversely, expressing negativity can be very healthy, and a partner who feels more comfortable seeing such expressions may feel more "in tune" with you for the very fact that you can let your walls down

This is what I dont understand about people. When did bad become good? Why can people only believe people if they are miserable? Why is being happy seen as creepy or manipulative? When did saying "I just want you to be happy" become an insult?

I thought the intimate goal of life was to be happy. Happiness is what you work your ass of to get, happiness is why you try to make a better life for your kids. Happiness is the goal, so if it's now negativity that is the only reality, what is the goal of that?

I just can't make heads or tales of that

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
Happy is synonymous with good

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
My original post, is trying to understand the lines by which people define manipulation, why wanting someone else to be happy is seen as manipulation. I understand that people think it is, but I dont know why.... and I don't like not being able to rationalize something.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
Thats a very small part of a bigger picture. He wants to be with someone he can make happy, I want to be with someone I can make happy. If we couldnt make each other happy we would find people we could. If I wasnt happy he would try to fix it, if he wasnt happy id try to fix it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
I dont see rape or stealing as making anyone happy, its a way to perpetuate negativity. Someone doesnt rape someone because it makes them happy they do it so they dont feel as out of control of their life, rape and theft are a result of helplessness not a desire to be happy. Just like someone who does heroin isnt trying to be happy, they are trying not care. No one does something destructive with the hopes of it making things better, they behave that way with the hope that they wont care anymore that they cant control it.

quote:

But you didn't define it as devious. Your own definition used the word "or," and said nothing at all about others' end goals, just your own benefit.

Why attach negativity to a word that is completely neutral, especially as it applies to your own behavior.

That is not logical, in my view.

quote:

Your logic is flawed here.

Wanting someone to be happy is not seen as manipulation.

Doing something with "shrewd" or "devious" behavior to make someone happy, especially when that is also in your own best interest is seen as manipulation.

quote:

And I, for one, am saying that manipulation is not NECESSARILY a bad/negative thing, although many do see it that way, and have a knee-jerk reaction to it.

quote:

Some people will find that this statement is uncomfortable to them, because in some views, you cannot "make" others happy, you can only be happy yourself, and others can be happy around and with you.

It smacks of telling people how to think and feel, to some people.

Me, I think it's just a different way of speaking. I believe I cannot MAKE someone happy, but I can do everything in my power to inspire that happiness, and help or simply offer support when there are other emotions in play.

quote:

Just a note, here... You are making judgments on how others think and feel, here, without solid evidence.

There are some people who have been brain scanned who actually do feel happiness causing others misery. Not everyone... but then, not everyone who makes others happy also feel happy themselves in the process.

There are no absolutes in this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
I didn't define it at all... it is defined. A definition is something universal, I then posted how I interpret that definition, how it corresponds to my life. Trying to personify a definition as if it is an entity belonging to me is ridiculous.

quote:

quote:

Your logic is flawed here.

Wanting someone to be happy is not seen as manipulation.

Doing something with "shrewd" or "devious" behavior to make someone happy, especially when that is also in your own best interest is seen as manipulation.

Something relating to personal opinion can not be flawed but in anothers opinion.

quote:

I was responding to others posts in which that was an issue. I had already responded to your focus on the word "shrewd" by explaining that I have no automated reponse, every action I make is "shrewd" I dont have an off switch. You can try to act naturally good, how you understand things will change because of that. I can not.

quote:

I am not automatically devious because I am shrewd, therefore only half the definition applies.

quote:

I only consider devious because the other is not something of choice. Everything we do has our own interests at heart, that doesn't make it stop being helpful to someone else. why do people bother volunteering for charity? Because they want to help people.... not manipulate them. They want it, it is for their interest..... it is not devious.

quote:



That is not how the definition is written. Devious is out fo the picture. That does not take away the other "proof" of it being something that makes you happy. Nor does the definition concern itself with others' happiness as a result. That's not important to define the behavior.

If I break it down, this is what I see:

Shrewd management: Possibly manipulation
Devious management: Possibly manipulation
Shrewd and devious management: Possibly manipulation
Shrewd management to one's own advantage: MOST LIKELY manipulation
Devious management to one's own advantage: MOST LIKELY manipulation
Shrewd and devious management to one's own advantage: MOST LIKELY manipulation

What it does NOT include:
Whether this needs to be with or without the other person's/people's awareness.
Whether it can be to the other person's/people's benefit.
Whether it can be to the other person's/people's detriment.
Whether it can use ice cream.

*smiles*

I'll stop after this answer. Words are one of my geeky places, and I am getting too granular, I'm sure. I'm doing this, though, because I usually see you as pretty logical, and I'm surprised at our miscommunication on this.

quote:

quote:

And I, for one, am saying that manipulation is not NECESSARILY a bad/negative thing, although many do see it that way, and have a knee-jerk reaction to it.

I do see manipulation as bad in the context of it being devious, which is how I understand it. In the context of it being shrewd I do not.

Agreed.

quote:

quote:

Some people will find that this statement is uncomfortable to them, because in some views, you cannot "make" others happy, you can only be happy yourself, and others can be happy around and with you.

It smacks of telling people how to think and feel, to some people.

Me, I think it's just a different way of speaking. I believe I cannot MAKE someone happy, but I can do everything in my power to inspire that happiness, and help or simply offer support when there are other emotions in play.

I hold no negative connotations toward the word "make", since I dont see the word as vindictive, it doesn't constitute a discrepancy. When I say "I want to make you happy" he doesn't assume im going to stick a pleasure probe in his brain and strap him to a milking table. He assumes im going to do everything in my power to make his path easier. And the same goes vice versa. Were as manipulation can be devious, making has no negative meaning in and of itself so I can not attach those feelings to it, or rather, would not.

I agree with you. *smiles*

quote:

quote:

Just a note, here... You are making judgments on how others think and feel, here, without solid evidence.

There are some people who have been brain scanned who actually do feel happiness causing others misery. Not everyone... but then, not everyone who makes others happy also feel happy themselves in the process.

There are no absolutes in this.

He asked what my understanding was, it does not affect others, it is my opinion. Brain scans are not an accurate source to form an opinion off of, they are notoriously vague and misinterpreted.... or rather interpreted to mean whatever is beneficial to a cause.... all they have to compare is the subjects brain versus the average brain. They know what an average brain looks like so they look for any difference and say well that must be the cause. Personally I have a hard time figuring out how more blood being diverted to your brain could show a guy being turned on *chuckle* all they know is that there is an increase of blood flow to a different part of the brain than the average person. He could be thinking "wow id really like to cut people up" or he could be thinking "these fucking idiots really think making me look at pictures is going to do shit" both would result in "abnormal" scans... the point being, we cant know what they are thinking, or more importantly, why. Why do people learn to gain pleasure from the pain of others. My response to his question was about the cause, not the effect.

Ok, so you don't accept brain scans as useful science. Check.

*smiles*


_____________________________

Nookie
--
https://datingkinky.com

I Write! A few of my books on Amazon: http://amazon.com/author/msnnotes

(in reply to DerangedUnit)