I feel like I should try my best to explain what I mean when I say I've set out on the path of empathy, because words are hard and most probably won't understand.
I'm bad with words in general. Even during kat's lovely message this morning, she couldn't convey herself fully, because translating concepts that are beautiful and wonderful in the brain to words for others isn't an easy process. But, I feel like I need to explain what I mean there.
I can't hate anyone, other than myself. I can barely feel negative emotions towards them, and largely, not strong ones.
I can certainly pity scumbags, people who are worse humans than I am. The likes of Republican extremists. But I can't actually hate them, despite the evil they propagate.
In fact, to some extent, I have love for them all, because I understand most humans are good. They can lose sight of their altruistic side. They can head down bad paths. They can become monsters propagating harm and become selfish. But I can't hate them, because they are humans who could do good and just...don't. I can hate their circumstances, and I can pity them, but I can't hate them.
This takes me to an extreme that I know I probably can get hatred for me for. So, it takes a lot of explaining, and I might not be able to convey the concept. I know what I'm going to say runs against the grain of most people, so I know my true conviction behind it is taking the hardest path I can opt for. But it is a path I genuinely believe that, if followed, would lead to the world being a better place for everyone.
I believe this is a path which would promote healing, love, recovering, reduction of harm, and overall, lead to a better, happier, uplifted world. I'm sure people reading this will think otherwise. Maybe they'll think me disgusting. Or insane. Or monstrous. Or an enabler of monsters. Or naive. Or whatever. I'm not an idiot, I know this doesn't universally work, despite the theoretical draw of it. But, I believe in it and want to devote the rest of my life to following it, my path of empathy.
And it starts with this.
I can't condemn a person for their actions, no matter how horrible those actions were. No matter how harmful the actions were, no matter how monstrous they were, I can't condemn the person for what they have done.
I do condemn their actions though.
To explain the difference between condemning the actions and condemning the person, that's where I need to put a lot of work, because I know what people will think by default. I know you already don't have a high opinion of me and what I've written might have turned you off already and made you think even less of me. All I can really ask is, please keep an open mind. I don't word things well, I'm verbose, I still haven't mastered the art of being short and to the point with my concepts (which is why apologies are walls), but this is something worth explaining.
Condemning actions doesn't mean giving the person a free pass. I know that most of the people I've befriended in the last three or four years have had a lifetime of trauma from people particularly in the religious/right-wing sphere preach about condemning actions and then letting the person get away with it. The toxic side of Christianity, where people are allowed to get away with it all, because they are thought to be good people.
No, actions have consequences. So, condemned actions carry the consequences appropriate to the action. To put this into perspective, it doesn't matter if you're the most amazing person in the world; if you run a red light accidentally, you're still getting a ticket. It sucks, but it's the consequence to the action, no matter how accidental it may have been. Maybe your good nature means you can get the fine reduced, or maybe commuted to some other form of punishment, but you still have to face consequences for the infraction.
That's a fairly smallscale example, but it scales up for all kinds of offenses. For instance, to swing towards the other extreme, a murderer may be sympathetic and even remorseful for their action, but it will still carry the consequence of jail time, reparations, etc. Good behavior can get the jail time reduced, but you're still going to serve time of some kind for having committed the grave crime of taking a life. That action carries a widespread consequence.
So when I say I condemn the action, I also mean that condemned action carries appropriate consequences.
So, what do I then mean by saying I don't condemn the person, if they still face consequences to their condemned actions? The two would seem to be diametrically opposed, opposites that are unable to be reconciled. And, to be fully transparent. Yes, in the real world, they kind-of are. The real world is very very complicated. You need to use judgement calls, and those calls can and often are wrong. It's a personal journey and case by case basis on where you draw the line. There's no perfect solution. There's just imperfect ones.
And it mostly boils down to what I am willing to forgive. My empathy means that's almost anything. If I see the good in a person and I see they are trying to be good. If I see the love and wondrous parts of the individual, then I can forgive almost anything. They still should face the consequences of that action--but whatever consequences entail, I don't believe in cutting them off completely. Maybe restricting them. Maybe distancing from them. But if they are a good person who just made a mistake and is otherwise a wonderful individual, then I believe in giving them a second chance, in allowing their better side to shine through, and I will help them do exactly that.
Especially since what is "wrong" is often largely subjective and based on perception. What is a mistake is largely subjective and based on perception. How many media feature both sides thinking the other side is in the wrong and making the mistake, while genuinely believing that they are in the right? And pursuing what they believe to be right, even if in the eyes of others it is wrong, carries consequences. I can look at an individual I believe or even know has done wrong, and see they genuinely believe they are in the right, and understand them. They are not a bad person, they are not a villain. They just are causing harm from having a flawed perspective and a flawed perception of the situation. So I don't condemn the person. I pity them, and take the appropriate action for their actions, but can never condemn them.
And I need to also specify. This is not a path of being a doormat. This is not the path of being an extremely unhealthy people pleaser. It's possible to have empathy for all while still setting personal boundaries. It's possible to not condemn a person while still restraining that individual because of their actions being too much to handle. Personal health comes first and foremost. Personal self-respect is important, just as being humble and showing humility is.
It's a fine line between personal self-respect and entitlement. But everyone is entitled to live, everyone is entitled to exist, everyone is entitled to set boundaries, everyone is entitled to respect, everyone is entitled to be a little selfish when need be, everyone is entitled to not being able to be empathetic all the time. And that includes me, that includes you.
I'm sure there's more I'm not explaining for this path. Developing it was a huge part of the 500+ pages of notes to myself in my personal discord diary. But the basics are the above.
Self-love.
Love everyone, even those who make mistakes.
Actions carry consequences.
These three are nearly impossible to balance, but if everyone tries their best to, then the world would be a better place.
You don't need to tolerate toxic behavior from someone. It's okay to cut them out of your life while still loving them.
You don't need to accept anything from anyone. It's okay to set the boundary of having closed off parts of your life to them.
You don't need to, so to speak, "take shit".
But you should still be seeking the path of least harm, and the path of most good.
That's the standard I've adapted and am trying to live by.
And it is also what I encourage others to do as well--even if by following it, the result is them cutting ME out of their life.
It's painful, but warranted. I've developed a good philosophy, but my philosophy only developed because I hurt people badly and want to be a good person and be accepted and loved and to accept and love others, despite my screwups.
So because I've done that damage, because my actions carry consequences, the logical extension of it is...
...I suffer whatever consequences I may face.
And that's okay.
I am telling anyone who reads this.
It's okay.
I am sorry for what I have done.
I understand what I did was wrong.
I know I caused great harm and pain.
So I know I face justified consequences to my actions. I have no say in what those consequences are. Only you do. Because you matter. You are important. And I accept whatever you deem appropriate. You are worthy of my respect.
Everyone deserves my respect. And I am so sorry if my path is one which hurts you even more now that I've tried explaining it. I'm so sorry if you feel I am very badly in the wrong. But on some level, I just feel that for me, this is the right path to pursue. I may never be worthy of forgiveness, but I want to forgive others. To uplift rather than degrade them. To focus on the positives, rather than the negatives. Not ignoring or downplaying the negatives, acknowledging they exist is important. But to remember the core truth that most humans are good, and therefore, there's more positives than we realize.
I hope you can understand me the way I understand others.
And if not, I'm sorry. Whatever path you take, you have my blessing, and I wish you luck in your life.
Love,
Bree.
Comments