We are intimately attached to what we accept and support. We are married to the standards we set and stick to, for better and (seemingly) worse. Certain compromises are an indicator of circumstantial character but there are also instances in which stubbornness can cloud the evaluation of context. Composure is key to objective analysis and serves as the delicate dividing line between haughty and honor-bound.
All situations have inherent terms that outline acceptable responses. The trouble lies in the “seemingly” new experience where there is no apparent learned diagnostic. You’ve encountered an entirely novel paradigm and the instinctual reaction is clearly unproductive (stalemate) or, most likely, detrimental. What’s the appropriate approach?
1. Rewind the narrative. Many times we get to a tipping point with no recollection of how we arrived there. Take a breath, repeat, replay, rephrase.
2. Unpack motives. Based on prior interactions, do confrontations regularly deteriorate this way? Do you always take the initiative to meditate? If so, there is a blatant imbalance that needs correction if the relationship is to continue.
3. Choose to move forward (or not). Now what? The confrontation (face to face) has reached its conclusion. There is a void that can continue or be filled with a new exchange. Declarations await. Time for tentative has passed. When something needs to be done, you can say “I do.”
There is no need to have cold feet.