What will i be when i grow up?

On Legacy, Repair, and Being Seen

What will I be when I grow up?

It’s a question I never had a solid answer to—not at eight, not at eighteen, not even now as i turn fifty. But it’s a question that keeps returning, reframed not as an external expectation but an internal curiosity. Maybe it’s not about what I’ll be, but what I’ll do. And maybe what I’ll do won’t be clear until I’ve done it. Until I’ve lived it. Until the shape of my life speaks for itself.

Lately, I’ve been holding a question with two stark poles:

If I got to the end of my life and my children were free—really free—from the burdens of generational trauma, free from administrative confusion about who they are or are allowed to be, free to simply be the siblings they want to be to one another… but I had left no legacy. No book. No course. No house let alone real estate portfolio! Nothing attributed to my name, nothing for the public to point to and say, "They were here."

Would that be enough?

And on the other end of the spectrum: If I did leave something—a work of significance to me, something I created and poured my soul into, something celebrated and remembered—but in doing so, I hadn’t fully resolved or metabolised the trauma I inherited and passed it forward, leaving it embedded in my children’s lives like asbestos in the walls…

Would that be worth it?

The heart answers quickly. The soul whispers clarity. Of course, I would choose their freedom over my visibility. Of course, their emotional sovereignty matters more than a monument to my effort.

There are days however, that find mind and emotional experience pulling and pushing in their shared space. Times when the mind needs scaffolding. Times when emotions arent sure which experience they are responding to. The mind struggling in the absence of proof.  It wants to name, to see, to witness something that says, you did well. That something happened because of me. That I mattered.

And so I find myself mapping the terrain between these poles—trying to find the middle ground between survival and sovereignty, healing and legacy, presence and visibility.

I realise: I am living emotional health, not defining it. I am not constructing theories in isolation. I am moving through them, body-first, breath-first, by repairing what I can and letting go of what I can’t. My emotional health is visible in how I’ve chosen not to pass certain things forward. How I’ve parented. How I’ve stayed present in discomfort, even when I longed to disappear.

This is inclusive practice, too—not just out there, in systems and language and advocacy, but in here. Inside me.

Am I including myself in the freedom I’m working so hard to create for others? Am I allowed to want something for myself—not instead of healing, but alongside it?

This reflection belongs in the body of work I’m building, even if no one ever reads it. It complicates the binary of success and failure, impact and invisibility. It asks: What if your legacy is not a product, but a pattern? Not a named achievement, but a subtle freedom passed down?

Maybe healing is a legacy. Maybe being deeply present, even invisibly, is a contribution. Maybe the work is happening anyway.

And maybe—just maybe—there will be time for both: healing and creating. Repairing the past and offering something to the future.

By the end of my life, the answer to "what did I do?" will have written itself. And that will be enough.

The Double Standard in MAFS: Physical vs. Emotional Aggression

 The Double Standard in MAFS: Physical vs. Emotional Aggression

In an episode of Married at First Sight (MAFS) (Ep 12, 2025), Paul punching a door became the central issue—replayed, analyzed, and repeatedly condemned. The show made sure viewers understood: this is unacceptable behavior.

On-screen warnings, repeated discussions, and expert commentary emphasized how aggression—even if not intended to intimidate—can still create fear and unease. However, while accountability was applied to Paul, it was overwhelmingly focused on shame, rather than a meaningful path forward.

From what was shown on screen, barely 15 seconds was dedicated to asking Paul whether he had sought therapy or learned emotional regulation techniques. There was no discussion about how to handle emotions constructively, no practical tools offered, and no focus on growth made apparent in the episodes.

Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay

The Pattern of Response

The response to Paul’s aggression followed a predictable pattern:

1. Public Shaming: Paul was repeatedly reminded that his behavior was unacceptable.
2. Social Superiority: Others distanced themselves from him, reinforcing their own moral high ground.
3. Focus on Guilt, Not Growth: Rather than being offered tools to manage emotions, it was obvious that the experts needed to see shame, remorse and disappointment from Paul.

Apparently, in other social media pathways, there was follow up provided for Paul and Carina.  Paul was banned from consuming alcohol for the remainder of the series (or during filming) and was made to attend weekly therapy on Saturdays.  

So while Paul was scrutinized, as well as given paths of action and improvement as management or support.  Another type of aggression was left completely unchecked—Adrian’s emotional aggression and coercive control over Awhina.

The Hidden Problem: Adrian’s Emotional Aggression

While Paul was publicly held accountable for his one-time physical outburst, Adrian’s persistent emotional aggression was ignored.

• Adrian has consistently displayed controlling, dismissive, and manipulative behaviors.
• Unlike Paul, he has faced zero accountability on-screen.
• There were no warnings, no expert intervention, and no direct conversations calling out his behavior.

Where were the clear messages saying:

• "See this? This is manipulation."
• "This is emotional aggression and control."
• "This is unacceptable behavior."

They didn’t exist.

The Impact on Awhina: Silence as Complicity

The most troubling part of this selective accountability is its impact on Awhina.

• No one has looked her in the eye and said: "What you are experiencing is abuse."
• No one has acknowledged: "You keep giving Adrian chances—not because he’s changing, but because you’re hopeful, attracted to him, or conditioned to see his behavior as normal." 
• No one has asked: "This person is repeatedly showing you that he is not focused on you.  Why are you continually giving this person chances?" 

Adrian’s emotional manipulation is in many ways much more harmful than Paul’s door punch because:

1. It is ongoing and calculated, it is not a single moment of emotional overwhelm.
2. He has no intention of changing—his arrogance, smirks, and ability to control conversations keep him in power.
3. His behavior is normalized—so much so that even Awhina (nor the group, nor the experts!) don't seem to recognize the problem.
4. It is direct and targeted towards Aphina, to ensure she backs off or is diminished enough to get weaker, less certain.

If the show is willing to condemn Paul’s physical aggression, why does it remain silent about Adrian’s coercive control and manipulation?

---

Where Does Punching a Wall Fit in Aggression?

Punching a wall is a form of physical aggression, but intent and impact determine how it should be interpreted.  Not to reduce its seriousness, but by better understanding its source and intention it becomes possible to address and action and decrease the chance of reoccurance.

1. Physical Aggression (Externalized Anger)

• Intent: To intimidate, instill fear, or indirectly threaten others.
• Impact: Creates an environment of fear, where others may feel unsafe or coerced. eg. Punching a wall during an argument to scare someone.
• Severity: Moderate to Severe, depending on frequency and context.

2. Self-Destructive Aggression (Internalized Anger)

• Intent: To release frustration or self-punish, rather than hurt others.
• Impact: Leads to physical self-harm and reinforces unhealthy coping mechanisms eg. Someone punches a wall out of self-directed anger, injuring themselves.
• Severity: Moderate to Severe, especially if repeated.

3. Impulsive Emotional Outburst (Poor Emotional Regulation, Not Intended as Aggression)

• Intent: A momentary loss of control, rather than a conscious effort to intimidate or manipulate.
• Impact: May cause distress to others but is often followed by regret and an attempt to repair the situation. eg. A person punches a wall out of frustration but does not intend to scare anyone.
• Severity: Mild to Moderate, but can escalate if unchecked.

Key Considerations

Punching a wall is often a red flag for poor emotional regulation, aggression issues, or deep frustration.

While punching a wall may not always be meant to intimidate others, it is a sign of unprocessed anger—one that can become more dangerous over time if not properly addressed.

If done to intimidate, it is a form of coercive control and emotional abuse.

If self-directed, it may indicate self-harm tendencies or difficulty managing emotions healthily.

If impulsive but rare, it suggests a need for better coping mechanisms before it escalates.

---

The Healthier Way: What Should Have Happened?

For Paul:

Instead of just shaming him, Paul should have been guided toward constructive emotional regulation techniques.

• Practical tools should have been introduced:
  • "Here’s how to process anger in the moment."
  • "It is ok to say I'm going to get noisy, best if you give me space" and then scream into a pillow
  • "Here is a physical, verbal and behavioural in the moment option instead of externalizing frustration physically."
• The experts should have reinforced that learning regulation takes time and effort.
• The focus should have been on growth—not just guilt and shame.

For Adrian:

• He should have been confronted with his emotional abuse:
  • "Listen to your own words. This is manipulation."
  • "Your tone is dismissive and controlling."
  • "This is toxic behavior, and it’s not okay."
• Awhina should have been supported in recognizing the patterns of coercion and control.
• On-screen warnings should have been displayed—just as they were with Paul.

For Awhina:

• She should have been given tools to recognize and respond to his tactics:
• "When Adrian shifts blame, here’s how to bring the focus back to accountability."
• "If he invalidates your feelings, here’s how to stand your ground."
• "When someone consistently refuses to take responsibility, that’s a red flag—not a challenge to ‘fix’ them."
• Just as Carina was encouraged to express any of the impact, Awhina should have been encouraged to identify why she keeps giving Adrian chances despite his refusal to change. 

For All Couples: Reflective Questions on Aggression

Instead of isolating Paul’s act as the only harmful aggression, the show could have introduced reflective questions for all participants:

1. Do I raise my voice, talk over, or dismiss my partner in conversations?
2. Have I ever made my partner feel small, embarrassed, or “crazy” during an argument?
3. Do I use silent treatment, withholding affection, or guilt-tripping as a way to control situations?
4. Do I minimize my partner’s feelings and make them question their own experiences?
5. Do I blame my partner when I’m feeling overwhelmed, instead of taking responsibility for my emotions?

These questions would have encouraged self-awareness and accountability across the board—not just for one person.

Final Thought: Accountability Needs to Be Consistent

Aggression comes in many forms. While society is quick to condemn visible violence, covert aggression—such as manipulation, control, and coercion—often goes unnoticed.

To build healthy relationships, we need to:

✅ Hold all forms of aggression accountable—not just physical acts.
✅ Provide practical tools for emotional regulation instead of relying on shame.
✅ Empower individuals to recognize and set boundaries against emotional manipulation.

✅ Let it be known that violence or aggression may take time to process. People watching or exposed in any way may not be able to voice their experience or the impact for some time afterwards.  Be prepared to hear echos of pain or concern.  Every moment matters regardless when a discussion arises.

If only physical aggression is called out, we fail to address the full scope of harm in relationships. Until accountability is applied fairly, selective outrage will continue to protect the most dangerous aggressors—the ones who harm without being noticed.

'Clearing the air' is not the same as 'getting used to the smell'

A Lesson in Health Communication : 'Clearing the air' is not the same as 'getting used to the smell'

Image by Engin Akyurt from Pixabay

In Australia, the reality TV show Married at First Sight (MAFS) is as fascinating as it is frustrating. I only watched one episode yesterday, and it confirmed what I already suspected: these shows are both, terrible and useful.

They’re terrible because they thrive on drama and manipulation for entertainment. But they’re also useful because they provide clear, real-world examples of common communication patterns—many of which are deeply unhealthy. When viewed critically, they can highlight what not to do in relationships and where healthier alternatives are needed.

A Perfect Example: Paul and Carina’s “Clearing the Air"

In this episode, Paul and Carina addressed something that had happened between them a year ago. Paul had ghosted Carina, and now, in front of the cameras, they had a conversation that was framed as "clearing the air."

But was it?

Paul had a lot to say—mostly justifications for why he disappeared. He explained himself, but where was the actual apology? Did he ever ask Carina how his ghosting affected her? Did she get the chance to express her concerns about his pattern of withdrawing under pressure?

If those moments happened, they were heavily edited out.

Instead, what we saw was a version of "acknowledgment" that wasn’t about true accountability. Paul wasn’t taking responsibility—he was searching for acceptance and hoping to be excused. His words served him more than they served her.

The Pattern: Why This Happens So Often

Because of social conditioning and family dynamics, Carina accepted the non-apology as enough. She gave him a second chance, not because growth had taken place, but because our society often rewards surface-level gestures over genuine accountability.

It played out like a parent-child dynamic:

Society (the symbolic parent) sees Paul returning and explaining himself and assumes that takes courage.

Carina (the child in this dynamic) responds with forgiveness and understanding, even though she never heard him take real accountability. The focus is on returning to harmony.

What was missing?

Carina didn’t know to say:

"You need to dig deeper than that. Here’s how your actions impacted me. And while I’ve moved beyond that time, my concern is that your tendency to shut down or run away will resurface when life gets hard."

What Accountability and a Real Apology Would Sound Like

Instead of justifying himself, Paul could have said:

"I’m sorry that my inability to communicate left you feeling ignored."

"I can understand that my actions came across as disrespectful and dismissive when I was overwhelmed."

"I need to recognize my tendency to withdraw when I feel pressured, and I will actively work on that."

He could have asked "How were you impacted?" and

"Even if nothing comes to you right now, if something stirs during our time on this experiment, please be sure to raise it with me. This has taken us both by surprise so it will be no surprise, if thoughts come up over time"

That would have shown reflection, accountability, and a commitment to growth.

Why It Wasn’t Enough (But Still “Worked”)

Paul did take a risk—he put himself in a vulnerable position by approaching Carina, knowing he might face rejection. That took some courage. But his motivation was not about her. It was about seeking acceptance from people he could see were important (ie. Carina's parents) and making himself feel better.

He was excited for a fresh start, but that excitement wasn’t based on understanding Carina’s experience—it was purely about his own desire for a new chapter. There is nothing wrong with this per se, it is completely understandable considering they have only just met and the focus for each person is to be as stable and settled as possible under very unique and destabilising conditions.

Sadly, it was enough for Carina because she, like many people, has been socialized to prioritize forgiveness over accountability. She has likely spent more time reflecting on how she can handle things better, rather than expecting others to do the same.

The Takeaway: A Healthier Option

This isn't about Paul, or Carina. This isn't about highly edited and perhaps even manipulated content. This is about a version of normality in communication across society, in families and relationships, and knowing that even if you know something isn't quite enough or isn't quite right. You can't know what to do, if you don't know what to do. We all know the standard path of "upset leads to explanations leads to 'everything being fine'". But what about if a healthier and more is needed?

Here is a start.

When someone who hurt you comes back and explains themselves but doesn’t take full accountability, consider asking:

"I appreciate you sharing your perspective, but I also need to know—do you understand how your actions impacted me?"

"What are you doing differently now so that this pattern doesn’t repeat?"

"I want to believe in second chances, but I need more than just an explanation—I need accountability."

Growth doesn't happen in relationships when we excuse behaviours without real change. If someone isn't digging deep, you might have to be the one to guide the conversation toward actual healing.

You might be the one who raises the subject again, and if you do, watch and listen to how they make space for you. This will give you an idea of the strengths and challenges ahead.

https://9now.nine.com.au/married-at-first-sight/videos/latest/carina-and-paul-clear-the-air-about-their-history/cm6efnufr000k0inwv6i6bh1v?

Three missing pieces

🧩

A few weeks ago, I opened up a puzzle and I went to separate out the sides from the centre pieces, as I do. It's a puzzle box that came from a library so it's not my own and it's not new. As I opened the lid I saw on the inside that there were "3 missing pieces". 

Now I chose this puzzle because the picture appealed. There are many other puzzles and I didn't choose or even consider picking up ones that I didn't like the visual for. It was 1000 pieces which i also knew would be interesting enough for me to keep coming back. So I already knew that i liked this image and puzzle I had chosen. A bonus was that I could imagine my child joining me from time to time, because the images were interesting enough for an occasional dabble.  

Stock Image by Dorothe from Pixabay

I got started. I separated out the pieces. I started working on it and though it was not a brand i knew, the segments, the pieces, they felt nice in my hands and fingers. A lovely weight, thickness and texture, both topside and base. A Good quality puzzle which felt nicer than most of the Ravensburger ones i do. 

And yet, curiously, besides working and doing the edges and finishing the frame, day after day after day, i didnt go back. After getting the frame done and a few segments, I left it gaping and screaming at me for attention every time I passed. 

I returned a few times to the space, to look and yet couldnt feel any pull to doing, inevitably other tasks or distractions whispered loudly enough to have my attention.  What I noticed was where I'm usually holding myself back from going to do a puzzle, I was just not even inclined. 

Tonight, having adjusted air flow and feeling keen to see progress, I sat down with the puzzle again. Someone commented about me returning to it and i heard myself reply 'yes, but ..... '

"Yes, but it has three missing pieces and for some reason that is enough for me to not want to go back to the puzzle."

Bear in mind i really enjoy puzzles. From word games to physical jigsaws, esoecially those irregularly shaped, i love the searching, the placing and the yearning to be able to do both actions over and over. I will get close to the end of a puzzle and hold off returning, just so as not to finish.  

It was a curious realisation that already knowing that the outcome, the end of the puzzle be incomplete, was enough to intrinsicly impact so much.  In another way, by knowing i was heading to failure in finishing, was enough to prevent me from wanting to do it. 

As I say that, I relate that to my struggles with parenting and some other challenges within the home, more so that they're linked to a never ending story, but also because there is never a guarantee that there is either an end point nor success. And yet I keep going with those things.  But whether it is because other humans are involved or the task will link with people somehow, I will act to the commitment not the inclination. Both are intrinsic. One catches the other when it falls, especially when curiosity is nowhere in sight.  

Occasionally there are extrinsic motivators, like wanting to finish sonething to give or gift to someone.  Once i had been gifted a beautiful puzzle from a friend, it was a moss and sticks image from a photo. One of the hardest puzzles i had ever done, I was intrinsically motivated as much as extrinsically, i wanted to be able to show that a gift had been appreciated, by completing it. These were however, unusual circumstances. Most of the time, there is pleasure and interest only. 

'Three missing pieces' gave me some insight into why it is I find job applications so challenging. Not only do I not know that they're going to go anywhere but i am usually very aware of which areas i may be considered insufficiently skilled or experienced in.  

This reluctance is not borne out of fear, but exoerience and a desire for efficiency.  Repeated interviews which will note what i have not done (though probably with sone imagination i could have pretended to, for the sake of saying something reassuring) instead of asking how i would address that gap or lack. One intriguing recruitment agency tick box is often emphasised by the client and employer. Do you have specific industry experience? When i apply, with full knowledge the industry or category is not one I've been in before, it is because  I know that from the job description the procedural, relational or compliance (ahem resistance) issues will be an easy read for me. That determining where the problem points are, will not pose the challenge for me. Likely the challenges will fit into the same five primary areas of resistence or systemic mistakes and I will meet at least three patterned types of reactions regardless of the industry or office I step into. But past experience tells me that if I see "three missing pieces" already written on the box, alot of time and effort will be expended unnecessarily.

Ofcourse, I still apply for jobs or projects I find interesting. Ofcourse I still broach project ideas and make meeting times to discuss possible paths and progress. If I am putting something for another reason, I can take the task all the way to an end point even knowing I will not be a primary candidate or that despite leaderships interest, the funding will not allow for a non operational project.

Three missing pieces. 

The questions this reminds me that I do not have answered are

- When do we know to stop vs to continue? Sometimes the best thing we do is persist and get through the obstacles and resistance. Other times, learning enough to know stopping and changing direction is a good decision and has your 'best self' in mind.  When we don't work this last one out early enough, it can cost us greatly or cause alot of harm in life.

- When is a gap the reason to stop? Rather than the opportunity to learn and grow? If Cirque du soleil performers or technology/artistic designers saw something they couldn't do at the beginning of show development as the reason not to do it, we would not have experienced the wonder and beauty of so many incredible shows. 

- How many definitions of success or achievement do I carry?

I know one significant one is completion. My children have had frequent frustrations when they ask me 'do you like this artist?' And my first thought and answer will be 'I dont really know.  What has my attention is that I'm impressed. They have playlists and an audience. They keep completing things and I admire that"  Whether in my children or a neighbour completing a renovation, it is something which stands out to me often.  

'Three missing pieces" offers an insight into how motivation, certainty, and the perception of success interplay in my experiences.

1. Certainty and Motivation

This is a situation where knowledge diminishes the desire to engage in an activity. Mirroring scenarios like job applications, where uncertainty about success dampens motivation.

However, in contrast, I persist in areas like parenting or household challenges despite the lack of certainty and knowing there is no such thjng as perfectikn.

Is this where relational obligations and a sense of moral or emotional investment comes in?

2. Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Motivation

Curiosity, commitment and enjoyment are three factors which can maintain intrinsic motivation. Rather like a three legged stool, where if one leg comes loose, you can still balance on two. And even with just one leg remaining, your skills and experience balanced on that one stool leg, can get you through. 

In the case of this puzzle, once enjoyment eroded knowing there would not be a complete puzzle, packing it up to start another one became an easy choice 

Especially as there were few extrinsic factors such as fear or expectation or even any social incentive and certainly none which couldn't be transferred to another puzzle (with no missing pieces)

But it did explain why so many years of my life I could continue and act despite three missing pieces. On the wobbly legs of commitment to growth and personal development, and i can thank my Autistic ADHD neurology for my ability to be curiose even in the darkest and most isolating of spaces. 

3. Completion and the Meaning of Success

My experience with the puzzle encourages me to look at, revisit my definitions of susuccessand just like any good dictionary, the same spelling of a word can have so many meanings. On one hand, it is understandable if completeness is a benchmark and tasks with known gaps or uncertain outcomes feel inherently unsatisfying or futile. On the other hand, there are plenty of examples which I could list, that have no guarantee of completion and where being able to see what is, is necessary in order to enjoy and stay fully present in life.

This definitely could apply to the “never-ending story” of parenting and home life. While there's no clear "completion," the stakes and relational significance provide a deeper sense of purpose.

feel inherently unsatisfying or futile. On the other hand, there are plenty of examples which I could list, that have no guarantee of completion and where being able to see what is, is necessary in order to enjoy and stay fully present in life.

This definitely could apply to the “never-ending story” of parenting and home life. While there's no clear "completion," the stakes and relational significance provide a deeper sense of purpose.

Whether in puzzles, parenting, or the pursuit of career opportunities, i can acknowledge that three missing pieces don’t diminish the whole—they simply challenged to revisit my perspectives.

Three missing pieces offered an opportunity for reflection and to revisit definitions or beliefs that once held meaning or served me in some way. Inviting me to further integrate my life experiences and knowledge, and remodel.  Just like people integrate new technology and materials into renovations, so too a person can do this and im reminded about something I had not really forgotten.  That showing up and staying present matters as much as achievement or outcomes, and how this can be missed once we leave the tangible and touchable world.

In the end, the "three missing pieces" serve as both a literal and metaphorical lens through which I can see the interplay of motivation, certainty, and success in my life. It’s a reminder that while completion can hold immense value, it is not always the only—or even the best—measure of worth or achievement. Sometimes, it's the process of showing up, staying curious, and navigating the gaps that defines growth and meaning. Other times, knowing when to step back, recalibrate, or choose a new direction is the most courageous act we can take. 

And yes - it had not escaped my attention that simply 3D printing or redesigning and painting replacement pieces, was always an option. 

As is so often the case. It was never about the puzzle!

"You're a liar!" Maybe an Apocryph!

 This word.  "LIAR" Could be a descriptive one, however most of the time when we hear it used and from the time that we learn it, it comes with an emotional halo. Or should I say emotional horns.

I was at a friends place for dinner and someone there was talking about another person "who just lies all the time" and I knew the dance I was meant to join.  I was meant to join them in thinking badly about the other person.  

The liar:  The person who doesn't or didn't tell the truth. 

I just don't see it as that black and white.  We are all liars at some level.  

So where is the line?

"How was your day?" and you answer 'Fine'.  It's a lie.  The truth would be closer to 'I'm grateful for some things being easier today, but I'm dreading the week ahead because I have overdue tasks to get through from last week. And I am still not well after the last two months of illness, but I'm better, but overwhelmed. So, I'm fine I guess'

Fork in the Road by Sharon Murdoch 
https://tiaki.natlib.govt.nz/#details=ecatalogue.1030738

As this is considered a socially acceptable lie and linked to understanding that people don't really want to know much about us when they ask 'how are you?'.  In fact, this is a social expectation which is considered polite when done by agreement, because if you both stood face to face and chose not to say anything, that would be considered not social and awkward and even making things difficult.  OK.  So this is acceptable lying. 

Knowing that people find sharing feelings either too intimate or even disorienting, I will tend to ask for an appropriately distanced fact - "Has it been a busy day for you?" or "Has your day gone to plan?".  For those people I can see feel comfortable in a topic loop, sure, I'll ask "Do you like the heat/cold/rain?".  These questions, while not in the realm of invasive, at the least offer an exchange of truth only because it is not perceived as too demanding or personal.  And for me, no lies needed and that is a step in the direction of alignment and health.

What about when you're talking about something, and you state something to the best of your knowledge eg "The shop opens at 9.30am" and your friend calls the next day and said "I had to wait half an hour. They opened at 10am".  While their frustration is understandable, especially if they were trying to work to a schedule, if they focus on accusation and blame this would result in two main choices, correction/defensiveness ("you could have checked before you went") or deflection/withdrawal ("ah commercialism it drags us all in!").   What if they also said "I had to wait half an hour.  I just can't trust you not to lie".  Would we class this as a lie? there certainly wasn't a deliberate intention to mislead.  So was it not a mistake? When information is shared, mistakes can happen especially if checks are not made or wrong information is available (yes, search engines do not always reveal all that is correct!).  By definition though, and depending on the mindset of the recipient, they might categorise that person as a liar. Especially when we move into the next category of storytelling.

You overhear some people talking with their friends at a table close by.  You hear "Well, what can you expect from them - they are such a liar.  You can't believe a word they say.  I mean they aren't ever ready when they say they will be and other times don't even turn up or make contact.  Add to that, they said they were sick and then I saw them at the festival with their other friends."  and the choreography and emphasis in this story is clear.  'they' are the villain and the person story telling is the victim, at worst, or an impacted observer, at best.  With a story, there is usually a message or a purpose, and I believe that that is true of all lies, regardless where they fall in the spectrum.  

Lies! Truth! Belief! Illusion!                 misia.com.au

And as with most human efficiencies, when repeated often, habitual responses can become social norms, acceptable or even expected, regardless of the purpose.  

"I am a liar" and "I am not a liar" can both be true at the same time.  The problem isn't in the word 'lie', it is in the emotional weight that people attach to it.  When used among friends, in the media or film or in our minds, the definition no longer matters - it is the choreography that is meant to dominate. 

On the spectrum or venn diagram of 'purpose of lies', which ones are considered acceptable?  

Is not a lie, a known untruth? An untruth deliberately given to mislead.  As opposed to any other unknown untruth or a mistake.  

Some of these lies are found to be acceptable or necessary and even named 'harmless' or 'white', and even someone telling many of these types of lies could be considered polite or socially easy to have around.  Someone who won't directly say "I think it is aesthetically unpleasant as well as too expensive" because that will potentially cause discomfort, but rather lie and give the impression that they feel the same way as the owner by saying "It's cute.  Good that you bought it".  Being seen to keep people happy and not 'rock the boat' is seen as being friendly.  In some cultures, like Japan, staying with the untruth is beyond expected, it is necessary to be seen as safe.  In Rizzoli and Isles, Maura is beautifully autistic scripted and cannot lie, but will often find a way to balance honesty with other social demands.  Herein lies a theme, the lying which is often seen as acceptable falls in the category of comfort.  Making or keeping comfort in a way which is considered acceptable in society.  These lies are therefore either necessary or 'just the way it is' and don't make someone a lier.

So, this brings us to the grey area.  Beyond the white lies, the harmless lies and mistakes as well as the lies which provide the social lubrication needed for people to feel happy, calm and comfortable, we head towards the grey.  The untruths which are not as easy to wave away as harmless.  They are tainted, questionable and less acceptable because they can cause discomfort or could turn out to be used to cause a person harm.  If this were a venn diagram, and don't we all love venn diagrams!  Lies of omission sit between the white and the grey.  Lies told in silence speckle the void.  On the one hand we can be glad to not know and the tv shows and cop dramas will usually make at least one reference to 'what you don't know can't hurt you'.  Allowing people to tell the truth because they don't know it.  And yet if asked, they would know that something is known, just left out.  

Is it easier to refrain from judging people when they say less or nothing?  And yet, are we not all entitled to privacy and choosing what we share and when? 

The grey zone is where convenient truths live.  They are the truth, but through omission, they are a lie too.  A little further down this spectrum, you will find selective truths.  Story telling, movie making or even just someone talking about their break up, will be filled with emotion and a need for people to connect to a specific message, narrative or believe a certain thing.  Even most documentaries and investigations with journalistic integrity would fall into this shaded category.  Truths and so many, as long as you continue to believe what we are saying.  

How far can this selective truth telling be stretched, until it becomes decorated or have alternative imaginative elements added to fill the gaps.  How often does this happen before it becomes a lie?  How many truths must something contain to continue to be the truth.  How many lies or embellishments can it contain before the truth is compromised?  And which truths matter?  Who determines this?  A movie can be made and be 'based on the true story of ...." and only have one key event and characters.  And yet, we don't shout from the rooftops that the movie director is a liar.  

What about David Attenborough?  Again, due to the sheer quantity of nature discoveries and sharing with the world, no one calls Sir Attenborough a liar.  However, over the course of a long natural history career in tv and film and sitting on the periphery of science, lies were told.  Recounts or reconstructions were prepared in order to evoke sympathy, shock or stimulate interest and learning.  Items were picked from one space and placed in another all for the breathless and well recognised voice saying "we might be able to see here, just under this rock, the rarest beetle pausing before changing form for the winter".  Was it all a lie?  No.  But that part was, a creation? a recreation? a story? a lie?

And then, as we move further across the spectrum of lies, the colours fade and darkness falls.  These are the lies which are considered self serving, malicious and are told consciously.  They harm and destroy lives and relationships.  The category of cons and organisations and people who make a living out of lies "Hello, I am calling from ** insert name of large telecommunications company here** and we are calling about your internet connection".  This is the land of lies no one argues about, because the social understanding is that this is 'bad'.  There is no good in this space.  We make references to people who speak with forked tongues or at split purposes and want to entangle or trap you.  This is a malicious zone.  It is dark and deadly.

But wait!  What about the lies that are malicious, opportunistic and ignore all others for personal gain but are not questioned?  The stay at home person who says they are busy and tired, however, doesn't want to talk about the details because that is too invasive.  The full time worker who hasn't told their partner about their gambling debt, because they keep thinking that this weekend it will get sorted out.  The reality radio show which entertains regularly by lying to a caller, only to reveal to them after 7 minutes of air time that the lie they were telling was all a joke.  White and harmless? Grey and not really a big deal? Dark and distressing?

What about the person who says 'i don't have any cash to spare' when asked to donate at the street corner.  Harmless and socially kind, just a way of saying 'no, no cash, and I don't want to be rude to you'?  It could be grey and diplomatic, even if there are a few coins jiggling in your pocket or they actually are offering EFT tap and go donations but it was a lie which helped you avoid being harsh and saying "i don't believe in your cause.  I don't think donations to your venture are worthwhile and honestly I'd rather buy an iced matcha this afternoon on the way home".  Or, just because it is not the truth, it is dark, dirty and at the end of a day, just another lie of many that are told without thought.  Again two things can be true - all money can be spared AND a person can believe that none of their money can be spared.  

As I see it.  When a lie is told whether through conscious construct or through allowing a story to form by omission, there is a purpose.  Every person could be accused of being a liar.  The question I have when I hear someone want me to join them in believing or accepting that someone is a liar is "Why do you need me to believe this?"

If I have contact with someone who doesn't share information because they know it will complicate things or consciously adjusts the truth or uses imagination to create new stories, my main thought is "What purpose does this serve?"  

What is it you want me to know, do or feel?  Lying is a skill, it is part of human development of thought, even people who pride themselves on their honesty and telling of truth, may still be part of a lie if they don't learn to face truths which come their way.  Living with authenticity is spoken about more often in these times of wellness, however having integrity doesn't mean there is no lie.  In fact, if a person only looks to judging others, seeing them as less than because of their lies, they may as well turn the finger of blame towards themselves and say "I am a liar"

In order to learn about lying, we need to learn to lie and to recognise what lies are.  

In order to learn about lying, we need to have experienced them as well as potentially tried and tested different flavours.   This includes learning the choice we have and the times which are more nurturing of truth vs a lie.  

The act of lying serves a purpose.  In our relationships with people, it doesn't call for much maturity to attack people because you see or hear about a lie.  It is no different to me pointing out 'cow' when I drive into the countryside.  I can keep pointing at cows.  At some point, even I would ask myself, Why?  Why do I need to keep pointing out these cows?  A toddler can do this and usually it is to show knowledge, share excitement of recognition and nurture connection, because someone will respond with "yes, a cow".  As we get older, we do this with other topics "XX is stupid" "I hate this song" and alot of this pointing out, is not any different in purpose to our toddler selves who want to share our experience, see who is our comrade and paying attention to us and enjoy a stirring of emotion which comes with recognition.  This moves from favourite artists to clothes and jargon which is 'cool' all the way to bonding with others who share our political views.  The purpose of connecting and finding comrades, and not feeling alone is very powerful and this can extend into what we find acceptable in behaviour, shared truths and shared omissions.  

Family units have this - topics which are not mentioned or talked about.  It can be as far as fantasy, fantastic apocryphal stories told often enough and long enough that they are believed by some to be the truth.  It can be for the purpose of maintaining peace and 'not causing trouble' or because the abusive family dynamics do not have a pathway for light or truth.  The change would be too much and a family would fall apart and disconnect over the sides of alliance, control and the multitude of feelings which have now become fact and cannot be questioned.

All because no one was offered space, exposure nor the room to practice saying "I made a mistake" or "I have come to believe something different".  These types of statements come with awareness, realisation and a degree of acceptance that what you did think, did know or did believe, is now different.  But there is danger in sharing truth.  There is risk in sharing realisations.  These sentences place us on the edge of what many feel is a chasm.  Vulnerability, is the hand holding between exposure/being seen and truth.  Throwing facts at others is not vulnerability - it can be closer to a form of aggression and yet, is safer and as evident by how our media works and many dominant family members, this is what most people learn.  State feelings and beliefs as facts, and the confidence and illusion of stability it throws out will be attractive to others who just want to feel connected, safe and free to follow on with their life preferences.  Ideally in comfort.  Dependant on the environment - saying "I made a mistake" or "I now know that wasn't true" can be a dangerous thing to do.  In business, in families and in society, the risk is that the first reaction will be "So you admit you're a liar".  Which takes us right back to the benefits of denial and avoidance and highlight that it is the challenge of accountability, intimacy and vulnerability which needs to be overcome if we are to move the bell curve of social normality to a healthier space.  

If we do not offer the significant people in our lives, the chance to practice saying "I made a mistake" or "I realise, what I thought, was wrong", then how is anything other than deflection, lies and attachment to beliefs what we as a society are nurturing.  

When someone says "Oh, I made a mistake" or any variation of accountability to knowing or learning something different.  Make room.  As a responder, you are at the fork in the road.  You can be titillated and drawn into a drama, unhealthy practice done for all time and repeat the lines of the accusors and limiters of growth "so you lied!" or ego, "I told you so" .... and savour the persons discomfort.  

OR you can look to the trees, and see that this is where growth and change and health have a chance, if you let it.  Reply with an invitation, 'ok.  Tell me more" or "What changed for you?".  The more that we can show each other that reflection, honesty about new learning or mistakes can be safe and that we all can be better people for it, the more chance we have of experiencing and expanding humanity and human-kind.

NOTE: The words apocryphal (adjective) and apocrypha (plural noun) are in use to either describe a noun or a type of text/writing.  The word apocryph is not currently in use, however with all the changes in the English language, where the word skibidi or rizz can be used and understood all thanks to a head in a toilet graphic, I will unapologetically use the word apocryph as an alternative to lie, if it suits me. :)

Full circles and ripples of thought

A long time favourite song of mine, Les Moulins de mon coeur (The windmills of my heart) by Michel Legrand, composed in 1968 with lyrics by Eddy Marnay has been a long time favourite of mine.  

https://lyricstranslate.com/fr/les-moulins-de-mon-coeur-windmills-my-heart.html

The English version, The Windmills of your Mind pushed the song to a broader audience through the film, The Thomas Crowne Affair (1968) with lyrics by Alan and Marilyn Bergman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPNx5ydr8VI

https://www.lyrics.com/lyric/5298908/Michel+Legrand/The+Windmills+of+Your+Mind

It is such a fascinating contrast that one language speaks to the spirals of the heart while the other, of the mind.  One refers to the pulse in life, the circular events and feelings and the inevitability of repetition. To feel the same when it is clear things are not the same.  The other version, also captures the rotation and spirals with a leaning to the turnings, churnings of the mind. Originally sung by Noel Harrison with a gentle impatience, and agitation which could either resolve or escalate towards anxiety.  Talking of same places and events and yet, nothing ever truly being the same.   To me, both versions and later versions sung by Dusty Springfield or Sting are beautiful poems with a melody which, regardless of the focus, nurture the descriptions perfectly.  

But this isn't a song review! (who would have guessed!?)

Situations coming full circle in life doesn't always feel fun or positive.  It can feel repetitive, like failure and a sign that for all the action, efforts and belief that you have changed something, in effect, nothing changed. 

A person who has lived out of home and lived independently, moves back in with family and could feel as though they have gone backwards.  A young couple however, may talk with family and move back home as a strategy for saving for a future house deposit.  The perspective of possibility makes the difference between feeling failure or hope.

In many human interactions from parenting and families, to businesses and management teams, the outcomes and quality of relationships provide the evidence for the more silent yet consistent traps, habits and patterned effect of trauma, generational attachment and even, communication styles.  Repetition is powerful regardless of how conscious or aware anyone is to it.   From healthy growth mindset in finance or entrepreneurial progress to the more challenging dynamics of abuse, addiction or control can be explained, where the skills and behaviours of one generation determine the direction of the next.  Where, despite the resources being different and the environment looking different, the relationship dynamics are repeated.  With no conscious input this plays out in health and in disorder.  For those individuals doing inner self work, reparenting, conscious communication shifts and actively seeking out other ways.

In some ways - coming full circle can be a great opportunity to see who you are and how you act.  Whether your current version of self is as different, as evolved or as grown as you thought.  Not to check for failure - but more to check whether your perspectives and skills come together in an 'old' environment, and show you your stronger or healthier self.  

Coming full circle can definitely show you that you no longer fit in a space at all.  You can return into a family dynamic which is in such conflict with who you are, that resolution or even just tolerating the space is impossible in a healthy way.  It can feel confronting and sad to see that connection, however feeble, is lost.  Elements like shared humour may no longer be accessible because once upon a time, connection was gained through laughing or diminishing others, and you can no longer do that without the knowledge that it is unkind and wrong.  It could be more practical, you may have a greater awareness of your sensitivities or inflammatory triggers, and so cooking together may no longer be a pleasure nor comfort.  Without accommodations or at the least, some discussion to know what can be prepared together in the kitchen, the act of sharing space decreases.

Taken from www.facebook.com/share/DUBAEBiUwT9KDkL5/

"1973 project regarding growth and tree spacing in southern Japan.

Researchers planted trees in 10 degree radial increments to form 10 concentric circles. It was a study to determine if trees' growth would be affected by planting density."

I was reflecting on this picture, on this project without any other inputs than the post and picture.  Seeing that after 50 years it does show that the centre trees are still the smallest, in this case, even though they were planted at the same time.  

However, they are crucial, and definitely a factor in the outer circle being the stronger and taller ones.

I wonder how much this is played out in our organic human existence.  

A pattern nowhere near as visible as these trees.  As a person or a group of people in a generation of humans, make a significant change of structure (and purpose and beliefs) that even for the years to come, they may still feel fragile, smaller, less recognised and from that centre position, wonder, 'was any of the change and effort and focus worth it?'.  Even with the mindset that "Every little bit matters" and "Every action counts", day to day life can become or feel a bit pointless or despairing to those whose entire focus and energy goes into the change.  

Those who come after have the space and place held for them, the resource access the stability of environment to expand, explore and ensure evolution happens.  This doesn't make their life easier, it simply allows their life to be different.  That when they look around they are exposed to two foundations - the old, the traditional and from the picture, the 'normal' planting of rows as well as the alternative, the new and from that picture again, the circular centre.   

In the case of trees, there will be little change in position over time, so the measures which indicate difference and strength will be in the size and overall health of the tree.  In humans, it might be the ability to accept rather than fight, communicate rather than suppress and maintain stability rather than live in confusion or inner chaos. 

Todays post does not come full circle.  Or from my vantage point in a meeting room in a local library, I only see some words and wonderings come together randomly simply because I haven't found focus on another task.  A consequence of a low energy log in to this account after five years away.  But one day, I may look back and see that it is just part of the less visible inner circle of my own challenges and changes in life, but from an aerial view, completely significant and supportive of any of the progress or growth to come.

For those interested, the melody to Les Moulins de mon coeur is said to have been inspired by Sinfonia Koncertante for Violin and Viola K364 by Mozart, 1779.

Three little words

"Tell me more" I heard my four year old say.

I was at the kitchen table.  One half filled with magnetic toys, dinosaurs talking with ooshies and other random, but not random to my daughter, bits and pieces which have needed attention during the day.  The other half of the table had two placemats for our rather late summer dinner. It was nearly 9pm but we had not been hungry earlier and there is always so much to do.  Elodie had some drawings she needed to finish and I was preparing some lunches for the week ahead.  In between our busy-ness, we chatted a little bit but not too much.  Eventually I said to Elodie that it was probably a good idea that we either eat the food I'd set aside, or I could put it away.   I asked whether the half of the table which we were to eat at, could be cleared.  Elodie said 'of course.  I need some help though' and I let her know I would be right there, as soon as I had the kitchen benches cleared. 

As I was ready to be at the table, I could see that it had not quite been cleared.  There had been animals, or other things which had caught Elodie's attention as she had started clearing.  I nudged things to the side with a serious expression on my face.  Neither happy nor sad, but focused.  Elodie asked if I was angry and i said 'no, I'm a little frustrated but I'm just focusing on getting this half of the table ready'. 

She looked at me and said "Mama, tell me more"

I could tell her that I was only frustrated because I felt that we had both been doing our own jobs for a while and now it seemed to be taking so long, for us to sit down together.  It was like I was now losing together time.

Elodie said she had a great idea.  She moved her chair ALOT closer and said "I can now hold your hand" and although I had not needed a solution nor more contact, she was very pleased with her idea and how close she was able to come. 

"Tell me more"

I have said this and more than a few variations over the years.  To Elodie, when she has been grumpy, I'll have said "I can see you're angry.  You wish something was different don't you?  Do you want to tell me more"

To her sister, when there are obviously things on her mind, I'd say "If you change your mind and want to tell me more, I'm listening" or

To my partner, it may be as simple as saying "Tell me more" with the understanding that it isn't an instruction nor a demand.  It is an understood invitation, which is easy to decline and easy to return to "I can tell you more about .... now"

These three little words can convey love, care, interest and consideration for a persons space, feelings and experience. 

In our home, these words have as much, or perhaps more power than "I love you".  We all know that we love each other.  A way of indicating that someone is opening up the option to share: "I'm listening if you want to tell me more" - to me, this is true care, generosity and a initiation of acceptance. If distilled, would these be the micro ingredients to Love?  

In all. I am so incredibly blessed to hear that Elodie is now able to offer this too.  

* this post was written in January 2020.  Only published today because I returned to this blog after a few years away.