[tacittales]

the "is all fair in love and war?" one, that is.

I like to examine the ways that people act, because their actions are often a consequence of how they think. In this place of places, the idea of open-mindedness is overtly hanging in the air, the very scent of possibility carries on the wind; a meeting of the minds, the new flow that is created when two streams interlock.

Let's suppose you start corresponding with a woman and really hit it off: you share a few points of view, he thinks she's intelligent and interesting, she thinks he's charming and witty. Both get a good impression, but neither wants to show their hand fully. Caught up in the joys of someone fresh and exciting, the woman inadvertently reveals that she weighs considerably more than her photographs suggested. The guy stops all correspondence in a knee-jerk reaction.

Is he a[n] [insert favourite expletive]? Consider the roles reversed, and whether the context alters in your mind. Even a different circumstance or attribute of each person: age [where it may fall above or below some arbitrary figure that lives inside of each person's mind as a measure of maturity, youth, fun, or similar], career, religion, political persuasion, some insignificant aspect of appearance etc. and it starts to make me think.

What does it imply about the notion of open-mindedness in ideal, and the notion in reality? I sometimes wonder if the outward appearance of this impartiality is more valuable to people than ensuring it resides within you.