notSpock wrote:
To me, always having someone's back does not require agreeing with everything they say or do. We can question a loved one's particular words or deeds without that being any kind of attack on their character -- even though they may mistake the one for the other. I want people to do that for me if they feel it is warranted.
Yes, that is not what I meant at all. A good friend should be able to question what we do if they think it wasn't right or sensible. If it's not clear cut right and wrong.
The examples I gave in my first post were ones where I was innocent yet the friend/relative immediately (and consistently) jumped to the defence of the person who had hurt me. People who constantly (with no exceptions) side with others against me are not friends.
As I said, the man who drove into my fence and gate was doing the wrong thing, I was innocent. The fence and gate were written off and completely broken. He wasn't injured, neither was his car. It was just my property which was destroyed. I should have called the police.
Defending someone you don't even know and isn't even there is just plain weird. You sympathise with the person you know, not some random stranger.
And making excuses when nursery workers let your granddaughter fall and severely injure herself...that is plain weird too. Many people would take the nursery workers to court.
_________________
That alien woman. On Earth to observe and wonder about homo sapiens.