[pax_et_bonum]

Thanks for the ping!

I hadn’t been on this thread but I couldn’t help but be nosy and investigate to see what was so serious. ;-)

For me, it’s simple; the truth and only the truth is acceptable in a relationship.

Once trust is broken it can never be restored to its original condition.

I would rather be alone than to be with a man who tells me less than the truth. Ever.

[bannie]

Once trust is broken it can never be restored to its original condition.

Bingo! And it bears repeating...

Once trust is broken it can never be restored to its original condition.

[rzeznikj at stout]

bingo...

[bannie]

I can even POINT to the MOMENT OF BREAKAGE in a couple of instances.

[WFTR]

Thanks for joining us this evening and contributing. I hope that you found the discussion serious enough that you didn't think I was being less than truthful in my ping notice. ;-)

I appreciate your thoughts on the topic. I can accept a woman having things she doesn't want to discuss. Particularly in the early part of a relationship, I expect that there will be places that she doesn't want to go. However, when she tells me something, it needs to be the truth.

The issue does leave open the possibility for a little nuance. If you aren't interested in a man, how far do you feel you need to go in being completely honest with him about why you aren't interested? In the case mentioned earlier, a guy was just a little too active with his eyes. Would you mention that fact specifically as a reason why you weren't interested in starting a relationship or would you leave it at "I'm just not interested?" To be equal, what if a guy is not interested in a woman because she has children or for some similar reason? Should he tell her that he's not interested in that relationship because she has kids, or should he not be that specific? Is refusing to be specific the same as being less than truthful? What if she presses him for a reason after he initially didn't get specific?

Bill