不要骗我。要骗，就要骗一辈子。
I still remember the above corny line from some HK script ... said by a woman who would opt that the man she loves be with her forever, even if he lies to her.
That very much parallels the feelings expressed by Marilla Brown (acted by the gorgeous Lauren Bacall) when her husband Mike Hagen (acted by Gregory Peck) came up with one outrageous lie after another to hide the fact that the pin-up model Lori Shannon (Dolores Gray) was an ex-girlfriend of his, in the movie "Designing Woman".
Lauren Bacall was cast in the role of an "uptown girl" fashion designer who, of course, got to meet the ex during a photoshoot of her designs, recognising Lori Shannon from her legs, which she had seen once from a torn scrap of photo found in Mike's apartment.
Didn't take the 2 women long to discover their relationship via a mutual man ...
Marilla (Bacall) was upset that Mike lied, but Lori sagely told her to leave it alone, and that she (Marilla) will find it pleasing (a doozy) seeing all the antics Mike kept trying to come up with to hide his past just to avoid the possibility of upsetting his new wife.
And at the end of the show, just when we thought Mike would confess, he came up with yet another wild story and Bacall ended the film with a voice-over narration, admitting that she found it a doozy ...
Since these 2 shows, I've always wondered ... are women willing to have their men lie to them ... as long as the men do it with the intention to keep the relationship?
Yeah, as long as their man comes home to them and not someone else.
ReplyDeleteWomen can be tragically devoted to the point of sacrificing their dignity or closing one eye to indiscretions, both past and present, as long as the man provides for the family and provides some measure of stability.
Just my two cents, gathered from narratives from my female friends.
Well, I can return you the question Snowy : " Are men willing to have their women lie to them as long as the women do it with the intention to keep the relationship ?".
ReplyDeleteI think (but I'm not sure), I would be disapointed because It would mean that the trust I would have for this person will not be anymore the same...
You mean, they don't care about love as long as the man provides her and the family ??
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'd like to think that I'm big enough to accept any truth from her, her past and her present.
ReplyDeleteBut to be honest, if I'm to go by how some of the male supervisors or managers work in the office, there're men who'd prefer to be kept in the dark about certain things just to keep a facade of "everything is under control" ... even if things aren't. They'd prefer to sweep problems under the carpet, make it someone else's problem or pretend to be blind and hope their staff can solve it.
I am of the view that if that's how they behave at work, the same character trait will be manifested, sooner or later, in personal relationships.
this is a question between the ideal and reality. A woman or a man, in different circumstances will vote differently. When one is free of want and need, one will lean towards voting for his or her ideals, like love, honour, trust... but when one is on the other extreme end and is faced with an uncertain future, or a life of abject poverty for example, he or she will most likely close a blind eye and vote for security and the blissful lie, like mailorder brides, mistresses, cuckoiding...
ReplyDeleteA person in a marriage with young children as another example, may prefer to not know until the children are grown up and able to fend for themselves.
Not everyone has or will have the luxury of ideals and principles, and yes, these are luxuries, not universal entitlements.
Where u stand in the greater societal scheme of things at this very moment in time, will determine your response to this question to a modestly accurate degree. It all depends on what you value most and are willing to weigh against other considerations at that given moment.
Wah km, I fully agree with you !
ReplyDeleteI would add that the response would be also determined according to your own story. I mean, it will depends on your past experiences and the lessons you learnt.
Each of us has his/her own story and it is often necessary to learn to know it (a little) before judging any of his/her acts which are often the reflection of his/her past.
Oh Snowy, I like your reply. There is a sentence that says : " Human is the fault, divine is the forgiveness."
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with KM too, I have a friend in this situation....
ReplyDeleteThen what about those who'd vote the same even under different circumstances?
ReplyDeleteI'd say that convictions which changes with circumstances are not really convictions but conveniences.
ReplyDeleteSuch rare peoples are then to be commended especially when they have to suffer for their convictions. History is full of such people, who die glorious deaths or waste their lives in house arrest or dark prison cells, or lay in unmarked graves. Few are those who succeed to live full happy lives for they serve to better the lives of those who come after them, and seldom if ever enjoy the fruits of their convictions themselves.
ReplyDeleteBut then... these are convictions that stand up to a greater injustice, to further a greater cause. What of those that don't better anyone's lives, or make any impact whatsoever on even your own life let alone those of others? Will u still stand by such convictions? Are they then really convictions and principles, or just stubbornness and pride?
That is rather hard to say ...
ReplyDeleteOutsiders are often not aware of why a person sticks to the same decision even though the decision might not benefit anyone, even himself, and put it down to stubborness.
While there're people who are just plain stubborn, it is not really in the place of others to make any judgments unless they can read his mind.
Well after 1911, there're still those who thought it was wrong for the revolutionaries to overthrow the Qing monarchy, totally against the Confucianist principles etc., and etc.
I tried to find out the reasons why a reformist like Kang You Wei still thought of restoring monarchy and refused to support democracy - wasn't the Qing incapable of governing the empire? Didn't their policies sucked? Wasn't Kang a principled person? Didn't previous dynasties only get established and gained legitimacy after deposing the previous?
I would like to say he's just being stubborn and proud, but all I can say with certainty is our views differ and he may not be unprincipled.
My view: I think the situations are too myriad to come to a view as to whether women are willing to have their men lie to them... even if it is with the intention to keep the relationship. The same applies to men too.
ReplyDeleteHowever as the original Chinese statement in question... if we think about it, it has its own logic and I can see how people (men or women) use it in their lives.
If you are told something that is ultimately not true, but you chose to believe it and that happens to be one of the anchors of your life, you might choose to continue believing it and ignoring any evidence to the contrary for your own peace of mind.
The ability of the human mind to construct their own rationale is one reason why we can survive great mental stress and thrive. Truth is important and useful to an individual or a group of people, but objective truth and facts are overrated as far as the individual and sometimes a society or specific culture are concerned.
In my personal experience, women are especially good at such rationalisation.
Agreed. Who's to make that judgement? Where is that line to be drawn between stubborn and principled? I have no answers for that either...
ReplyDeleteLOL. My sentiments exactly.
ReplyDelete