Intimacy breeds contempt. That is not a foreign theory or statement to many relationships. Respect. What does that mean exactly? I have read philosophical ideas that have been put to theory by Kantz, Wood, etc. They have an idea of what people "think" respect means or how we can apply those philosophical ideas of respect to objects, people, morals, ethics, animals, you name it. However, I don't believe that most people truly understand the meaning of respect. There is respect for others, self, objects, the world, ideas...OMG I have read so much about respect it makes my head spin.
In most of my intimate relationships there has been respect initially. The curiosity of developing an interest in someone, the attention we receive as a response from that individual that leads to dialogue of intimate attachment. Then, with that comes some sort of bond, love? As I've previously written it has escaped most people as to the full meaning of that concept. But with that said, love develops. We intertwine into a dance of intimacy that makes the relationship mutual and healing for us in some way in our lives. Fullfillment.
Then, something happens. In most relationships, fighting is an arbitrary disagreement usually about nothing and can develop into this huge something else. A disagreement, makeup, then intimacy returns to baseline. Usually, if both parties are willing to agree that the disagreement was resolved. AND, it is usually christened by "make-up" sex. However, when this disagreement occurs, some kind of degradation of the intimacy occurs. If the individual is a grudge-holder then...oh shit! Resolution isn't likely. So, complete resolution of that particular issue may come to a null and void stance of the passive individual who didn't really have an investment in the disagreement in the first place. Did the respect truly return to baseline in either case?
Respect. I read in a Philosophical Dictionary that respect can be a "special feeling of profound awe and respect we have in the presence of something extraordinary or sublime, a feeling that both humbles and uplifts us." In this context, what is it that provokes this "feeling of profound awe"? Is it the worthiness that we have placed on that particular person or thing? Then, the question comes to mind of how is worthiness caculated? By our own perception of self-worth and standards that we place on those individuals to be worthy in our eyes. That's what. And, if our standards are faulted or skewed in some manner, we're absolutely fucked, because then the respect becomes disdain or disrespect.
So, in all the readings that I have persued thus far it comes to mind that self-respect was a common theme of obtaining respect from others. Interpretation of arrogance was not included in those readings, however. So, if your actions are in line with being a self-respecting and respected individual according to the mores of that particular person influenced of course from their own perspective cultural differences, etc. Then, sure! You can be respected. Confucius said, "Respect yourself and others will respect you."
Must a person always be respected? Of course not, there are immoral acts, unethical behaviors, just down right stupid boner things that people do called mistakes. But are those mistakes taken into account as a mistake? I have no idea. I have not yet to meet one person in my life other than my own Mother who would account my errors of judgement as temporary losses of insanity that did still deserve the respect to consider that maybe it was just....a mistake. So, respect has that flavor of being conditional outside your PRIMARY UNIT. Shit. There's that damn concept again in my own mind. Conditional outside the influences of our own families and not necessarily true as our own families sometimes skewer and grill us for those MISTAKES. Mistakes in my family are taught to be "learning experiences," as long as they were not repeated of course.
But, back to self-respect. So, we know that it is not always available to be respected by others, then why would it be in error not to always respect ourselves. Not an error, according to most readings. Actually it is a normal human response to not appreciate oneself in situations that do not align with our moral upbringings. And, on top of that, judging oneself is a common practice in American societal acceptance of lack of self-respect. Meaning, that if you don't like yourself, it is often admonished and you are told that you "should" have self-respect. It is afterall, the moral thing.
I read on a website that "Sensitivity is at the core of respect. Accepting the person as they are without wanting to change them to suit us; fully acknowledging their values, culture, identity and who they want to be; valuing their contributions, opinions and inputs and genuinely listening to them and sharing their concerns. These are all essential elements of showing sensitivity to the person they are, and wish to be. When we put ourself and our needs first, and can only see our values, cultures and opinions, we are lacking great sensitivity to those we care for and are actually denying them respect, no matter what we say to the contrary."
Hmmm...so giving respect you receive respect and if you don't give respect you're not going to receive it and you really don't care. Wow. You would think that such a simple thing like respect would be one of those golden rules you learn in Kindergarten. At home, when you're little. In public when you're speaking in more than one context to anyone. Addressing your wife or husband in particular.
Intimacy breeds contempt. You know their triggers, you know their tones, you know their facial expressions, you know their body language. So, if you know all these things, why would there ever be any disrespect in the intimate realm of any relationship? That definitely does not make logical sense. That's called vengeance. Contempt.