Lizard,
The feeling's mutual. I enjoy your posts because it doesn't feel like I'm arguing with you as much as engaging in a dialogue.
Now back to the discussion. There's a lot going on in your post, so I'll reply as I go down the line.
I'll agree that 'disloyal' and 'dishonest' are strong words. They're strong because the lead no doubt as to where the person who wields them stands on the issue (or someone). Secondly, I see disloyalty and dishonesty in a similar light to the adjective 'pregnant'. That is, a woman is either pregnant or she isn't. She can't be just a 'little' pregnant. Maybe that way of speaking is provocative - it's meant to be. To borrow the words of a friend:
So in summary - perhaps the OP's friend is committing small acts of dishonesty and disloyalty because the scope is small. It's still dishonest and or disloyal (unless there's more information that proves otherwise).
That said, I concede your point about lack of social grace. I barely noticed "two set" which reeks of PUA and an overly logical nature (need to categorize everything and develop systems for dealing with it. Wingman and aloof are among the language that everyone uses - so those don't raise any red flags to me. That said - I can see this whole thing arising from lack of social grace on both sides, which goes back to my point and concession about lack of data on my part.
As for the litmus test - from where I stand, you calling it "feminine" as women often test men and friends strikes me as shaming language. That is, reminiscent of the kind women use on men who express opinions or desires that the women disagrees with or dislikes. So right back at you.
Let me clarify my thinking on Litmus test. I don't test my best friend. I trust him without reservation and with my life and he the same for me. He's already proved his worth to me. And from there you might say "Aha! So you [have] test[ed] him!" No. I haven't. Through his actions, I can tell that he has my back through thick and thin. In other words, he's proved (shown) his loyalty to me. It's called cause meet effect. Or deductive reasoning.
To put in practical terms that are relevant to the OP. I'm not telling him to cut the guy out of his life just to see the man's reaction. I'm telling him that if he cuts that guy out of his life for bad character, if it was a mistake to do so (i.e. that wingman actually was of good character), it's likely that the wingman would act a certain way (asking OP what happened), revealing his good character.
In simpler terms - if the wingman's actually a good guy - I believe the OP can deduce that from how he handles it. But I don't think the OP's wingman is a good guy (I think said wingman is disloyal and dishonest) and that's why I advocate the cut.
I realize I may not argue my point clearly as I think I do - let me know if that's the case.
___________________________________________________________
I'm very lucky that I have the parents that I do and a best friend who's as much of a thought criminal as I am. I almost had a girlfriend (adopted girl from Russia) who was a thought criminal too - it didn't last - but that's neither here nor there.
Despite this - I still feel lonely at times. That scares me a little, honestly because though I can't imagine it, I know that guys who don't have one or either of those surely have it worse. So I don't talk about it, generally.
I mostly agree with the part about friendships. The part I disagree with is that all friendships deserve a real effort to grow and cultivate. There is only so much time you've got in this life and you don't get it back. So choose carefully who you invest your time into. Maybe a better way to say that is - prioritize. I don't mean to go from one end of the extreme (cultivate All the friends!) to the other (fuck All the friends!).
I agree that friendships should not be severed over trivial matters or articially tested. Life will test your friendships enough! I am only guilty of advising to be discriminating with regards to what you do with the test results. While I wouldn't go as far as to say one should 'relish' a friend's faults, but I agree with tolerating them so long as their not egregious or incompatible with a good character. A quick example - my best friend's got a different philosophy on monogamy than I. Despite the fact that I haven't been a Saint with all my girlfriends, we're still best friends even if he can't condone some of my actions.
Finally - I agree with you, Lizard, wholeheartedly on your post. I read the entirety of it and the thread it was in. With one caveat - like Aneroid Ocean pointed out.
Finally - to the OP - I do think it's a good idea to forgive your wingman, for he is only human. But do it for you, not him. Holding a grudge is venomous to spirit. I still advocate cutting him from the team, but if you don't - at least keep a close eye on him.
G
The feeling's mutual. I enjoy your posts because it doesn't feel like I'm arguing with you as much as engaging in a dialogue.
Now back to the discussion. There's a lot going on in your post, so I'll reply as I go down the line.
I'll agree that 'disloyal' and 'dishonest' are strong words. They're strong because the lead no doubt as to where the person who wields them stands on the issue (or someone). Secondly, I see disloyalty and dishonesty in a similar light to the adjective 'pregnant'. That is, a woman is either pregnant or she isn't. She can't be just a 'little' pregnant. Maybe that way of speaking is provocative - it's meant to be. To borrow the words of a friend:
Quote:Quote:
This is in order to arrive at resolution with the utmost alacrity – not because I enjoy conflict (I don’t).
So in summary - perhaps the OP's friend is committing small acts of dishonesty and disloyalty because the scope is small. It's still dishonest and or disloyal (unless there's more information that proves otherwise).
That said, I concede your point about lack of social grace. I barely noticed "two set" which reeks of PUA and an overly logical nature (need to categorize everything and develop systems for dealing with it. Wingman and aloof are among the language that everyone uses - so those don't raise any red flags to me. That said - I can see this whole thing arising from lack of social grace on both sides, which goes back to my point and concession about lack of data on my part.
As for the litmus test - from where I stand, you calling it "feminine" as women often test men and friends strikes me as shaming language. That is, reminiscent of the kind women use on men who express opinions or desires that the women disagrees with or dislikes. So right back at you.
Let me clarify my thinking on Litmus test. I don't test my best friend. I trust him without reservation and with my life and he the same for me. He's already proved his worth to me. And from there you might say "Aha! So you [have] test[ed] him!" No. I haven't. Through his actions, I can tell that he has my back through thick and thin. In other words, he's proved (shown) his loyalty to me. It's called cause meet effect. Or deductive reasoning.
To put in practical terms that are relevant to the OP. I'm not telling him to cut the guy out of his life just to see the man's reaction. I'm telling him that if he cuts that guy out of his life for bad character, if it was a mistake to do so (i.e. that wingman actually was of good character), it's likely that the wingman would act a certain way (asking OP what happened), revealing his good character.
In simpler terms - if the wingman's actually a good guy - I believe the OP can deduce that from how he handles it. But I don't think the OP's wingman is a good guy (I think said wingman is disloyal and dishonest) and that's why I advocate the cut.
I realize I may not argue my point clearly as I think I do - let me know if that's the case.
___________________________________________________________
I'm very lucky that I have the parents that I do and a best friend who's as much of a thought criminal as I am. I almost had a girlfriend (adopted girl from Russia) who was a thought criminal too - it didn't last - but that's neither here nor there.
Despite this - I still feel lonely at times. That scares me a little, honestly because though I can't imagine it, I know that guys who don't have one or either of those surely have it worse. So I don't talk about it, generally.
I mostly agree with the part about friendships. The part I disagree with is that all friendships deserve a real effort to grow and cultivate. There is only so much time you've got in this life and you don't get it back. So choose carefully who you invest your time into. Maybe a better way to say that is - prioritize. I don't mean to go from one end of the extreme (cultivate All the friends!) to the other (fuck All the friends!).
I agree that friendships should not be severed over trivial matters or articially tested. Life will test your friendships enough! I am only guilty of advising to be discriminating with regards to what you do with the test results. While I wouldn't go as far as to say one should 'relish' a friend's faults, but I agree with tolerating them so long as their not egregious or incompatible with a good character. A quick example - my best friend's got a different philosophy on monogamy than I. Despite the fact that I haven't been a Saint with all my girlfriends, we're still best friends even if he can't condone some of my actions.
Finally - I agree with you, Lizard, wholeheartedly on your post. I read the entirety of it and the thread it was in. With one caveat - like Aneroid Ocean pointed out.
Quote: (09-28-2015 08:03 PM)AneroidOcean Wrote:
Quote:Quote:
see if you can make new friendships with like-minded men
This is huge. Like-minded men. The guy in the OP's story may be a guy who has always been there for him, wingmanning like a champ, and also being a guy who has benefitted his life greatly.
However, I think it's likely that it's more of a loose association/light friendship that they have going on and the guy doesn't have a strongly proven track record. Otherwise, I find it strange that the OP wouldn't mention those things.
Finally - to the OP - I do think it's a good idea to forgive your wingman, for he is only human. But do it for you, not him. Holding a grudge is venomous to spirit. I still advocate cutting him from the team, but if you don't - at least keep a close eye on him.
G