I've learned a bit, and I do believe it has been a worthwhile education. A couple of items exist that need discussing. There are things that I should have known, but didn't. There are things that were impossible for me to know until I was in the situation. Hindsight does the favor of having clarity, and I would also say that hindsight can become blurred as well. But discussing the accuracy of hindsight is not the purpose of today's discussion. Keeping focused...

My discussion of the boat was more than an exaltation of my boat. It also provided the necessary knowledge to understand that making comments about other boats isn't proper and is not appreciated by my boat. Even if my comments were not meant in that way, I can understand the effect the comments had. That is not an effect that I want to have. I will not ask the boat to understand and temper their feelings. I will change my behavior to allow for the feelings of others. I can do this once it is known. I will still defend against the should have known component. But, that is not a defense of my speech, and it is not an attack on the boat's sensitivities. The sensitivities are not wrong.

I made a mistake previously. I made the mistake of trying to get others to understand and accept me without first understanding them. I put myself out there in bold fashion without a thought for how my words can affect another. I used to think (previous, past tense, not any longer) that if another person got offended that was their fault. If only they knew better, and they should know. It was a selfish way of thinking. That way does not invite others. That way pushes them away and builds walls, instead of building a bridge. The walls are covered in spikes too. Spiky walls are difficult for others to navigate. Minefields are difficult to navigate too. I have a deeper understanding of how someone can choose to approach the spikes and navigate the land mines because they love the person using the spikes and mines. That someone will keep going back. I find myself in that position, and it's where I gained an understanding of this concept. There are spikes, and I am willing to be cut. There are mines, and I am willing to be exploded on. All these exist, and it is my intense desire to get past the defenses that keeps me coming back. The underlying thought goes, "I don't care if I get hurt in the process because I am gentle, kind, nice and here to understand."

There's good news. The good news is that I am using these processes in all my interactions. I am building bridges. I am also looking inward, tearing down walls, and digging up mines. There's bummer news also. The bummer news is that people who once only knew the spikes and mines can sometimes be afraid that the spikes and mines still exist. That's a very valid fear. My own experience teaches me this same lesson. I get it.

I use the skills discussed above to keep this in line with a respect for the other. I do not attack their experience and what they learned from that experience. I seek to understand. I change my behavior, and I do not attempt to make them understand so they change their behavior.

I'll throw another thought out here: Do I do this for everyone? Oh man! That might get me confused to navigate in practice, so I will explore the nuances of how this can be applied. I see an obvious group where it will always be applied. That group is people that I genuinely care for and love. Those are the ones who deserve my utmost care and understanding. I am not out to change them, I am here to understand and accept them as they are. These folks do the same for me. That mutual respect is part of the foundation of the relationship. I can see a group of people that would not be candidates for my highest level of understanding and care. I will take this moment to say, this group of people does not get rudeness or a lack of empathy. I can feel empathy for those people, and I can choose to disengage rather than change myself for them. I will take the moment to repair the damage, if possible. I am then allowed to decide if this is a person that I want in my life. If no, I can move on, knowing that I meant no harm, repaired a bit, and practiced a bit of empathy along the way. I almost began to say there exists a third group of people that fall somewhere in the middle. I stopped myself because that second group has a qualifier that sorts people into two groups, those who I want in my life and those I don't. So, I've already got three groups: the people I care for, the people I don't, and the people I would like to have as friends and acquaintances.

The concept discussed turns less on groups of people and who gets empathy and compassion. It becomes a continuum for all people. All people deserve the empathy and respect. The turning point comes back to me. Who gets access? It also does not depend of their treatment of me. I said above, "these folks do the same for me." But that isn't a condition or prerequisite. It doesn't change what I do. It could be meaning to say that my deepest reserves are for reciprocal relationships. This also does not mean that I must abandon myself because I love someone. It does not permit cruelty and manipulation. It also does not make any promises about the future. Past access does not equal future access. My humanity can be defined simply: treat people with kindness and empathy, avoid unnecessary harm, repair when possible, and discern an appropriate level of access.