A Lesson About Commitment
1 Commitment
Commitment is like trust: it’s a choice. It’s a purely an individual choice that should not be built on a pretense of some specific response. You commit because it’s what you choose to do and you uphold that commitment because that is what you choose to do (the honorable thing to do, I might add). The commitment isn’t about controlled responses or specific actions.
Hell, commitment isn't even about love. Commitment is about us doing our part. And if we are focused on doing our part, we should have so much to keep us busy, we cannot possibly police our partners efforts to do their part. If they are committed, then they will show up and if they do not then address their lack of commitment and decide if the two, or more, of you should be in a commitment at all.
We often confuse commitment with control. We say we want someone who is committed and/or consistent but we are really saying we want someone who will act the way we want them to act and do the things we want them to do when we want them to do it. We think that means something. We think that demonstrates the other person is worth our time and our efforts to build a relationship. We are trying to quantify emotions and justify our participation in the relationship. And God help the individual who cannot figure out and chooses not to give us what we want, (the secret expectations) because we will leave so quickly (and usually so viciously) that one would have to wonder if we ever loved them at all.
But I submit to you that a relationship is a commitment and not a tradeoff. We cannot go into relationships looking to emotionally barter for the things we want. We should go into the relationship because we want to share a life with that person and are committed to doing so. And if for any reason we decide that we no longer want that relationship, it is better to leave and free the other than to try to punish or manipulate that person into doing the things that make the commitment desirable for us. That is a perversion of commitment that results in a kind of romantic possession.
2 Possession
We live in an imperialistic society. America is all about aggression, competition, and domination. As individuals, we allow that mindset to saturate our thoughts about how to approach everything in life. Therefore, we go into a relationship with a battle mentality — which wouldn’t be so bad if we chose the right enemy. The problem is instead of battling public opinion and social norms, we fight each other.
We go into relationships determined to create this ideal existence that we have in our mind and to get this person (who we may love and genuinely want to be with) to be what we think they should be — of course this is dictated by our ideals of a relationship. And every now and then we will listen to the other person’s ideas about relationships and if they do not match ours, we endeavor to convince, persuade, debate, and/0r force them to think, adopt our perspective or at the least submit to doing it our way.
So, then, the commitment becomes not only about control but a battle for possession. We begin to use the relationship to possess the other person.
We manufacture arguments and issues to shame and guilt our partners into seeing things our way. We twist and reshape perceptions of events to prove the point that we were right all along, and our partner should have seen that long ago, and we wouldn’t have the problems we have. In relationships no one owes the other anything. What we do for our romantic partners and our platonic relationships should be done because it pleases us to do it. Not because of something our partners do or something we expect them to do. That is a corruption of the relationship that commodifies the relationship and makes it an item to be disposed of when it stops working. When we no longer see any worthwhile value.
3 The Problem
The problem is that we won’t accept that building a relationship is a process that is altogether different than anything else we might do in life. The relationship is at least 80% about commitment (personal commitment). It’s probably 10% about love and 10% about timing. As Americans we have grown to be some of the most spoiled, irresponsible, and lazy people on the planet. We, with our privilege and superiority complexes, think that nothing should be exceptionally tough and that we deserve the best of everything just because we do. Most everything considered very valuable also has a higher cost to obtain. That which we deserve is relative to what we have done to earn it. You normally won’t get something for nothing.
As great as we think we are (and sometimes we can be), someone else is great, too. If we could find a way to connect with one another in a way that isn’t about competing, dominating, and manipulating to get what we want, we might find ourselves able to develop meaningful relationships that hold a lifetime of value. It is no great secret why past generations had more successful marriages and partnerships — even the ones that weren’t love at first sight (i.e. arranged marriages). Those people honored commitment and they understood relationships.
4 The Point
Anyone who watches the show Scandal knows that President Grant is not at all in love with his wife (as he is in love with Olivia Pope) and it is questionable whether his wife is in love with him or simply using him for political gain; however, what she said in many scenes was more poignant because of the lack of love/romance in their relationship.
What she described is ‘we’re married/in a commitment and with or without love, you should show up and be present in this relationship.’ That’s heavy because she's right. And by the end of the episode President Grant does show up for her and it is a tender moment that speaks volumes. It shows us that love shouldn’t be the only inspiration to “do the right thing” or to show up and give effort to a relationship.
So, then, I would imagine if we could get to that point of honor in our actions. To understand the commitments in our relationships unselfishly, without pretense, and regardless of love, then imagine what two people who are in love might accomplish. Love and affection and all those right and wonderful things our romantic partners provide make our efforts even more worthwhile and they give us a sense of satisfaction about the relationship, but, at the end of the day, they can’t be the motivation to do those things. We must choose to do them and to choose to do them even when there is NOT immediate gratification.
Love and relationships aren’t destinations at which we arrive, they’re evolving journeys that constantly require our attention and our commitment in order to get the rewards we desire. Perhaps the next time we enter a serious commitment, we should, for the hell of it, commit without pretense and without judgment. I’d be willing to bet that even if the relationship doesn’t last forever, we would separate away much more enriched and with a lot less emotional baggage.
We would continue our personal journey having been taught concepts that heal versus injure, that build instead of destroying. I want to be remembered by those I enter a commitment with as a teacher, dependable, supportive, honest, admirable, allowing for an exchange of ideas, letting go of rigid attachments, exchanging selfish beliefs and giving up the mandate that I must control every aspect of views held during the commitment. Have you ever heard of a fusion?
5 Conclusion
It’s a process of joining two or more things together to form a single entity. Imagine the fusion of ideas we could create if that became one of our priorities in a commitment and relationships. That’s what I strive for today and tomorrow.
(Ghost Writer) An Angry Black Man
and
Co-author Ronny Carrington See less
https://www.facebook.com/Carringtondynastyblogspotcom
Comments