Azure Jane Lunatic (Azz) 🌺 (
azurelunatic) wrote2012-10-26 10:04 am
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Trust inside the Black Box: a rant.
Something on my reading list today reminded me of this thing that is sometimes in my life.
I happen to have trust issues.
I have been asked, more than once, sometimes in these exact words: "What can I do to make you trust me?" This might be a reasonable request to someone who is not me and does not have the same shape of trust issues that I do.
At some point during the last six months, I read a blog post on the way that some people (mostly men) treat attempting to get sex out of a particular woman as a "black box" system that can be gamed: feed enough different inputs into the system, and EVENTUALLY BY THE LAW OF AVERAGES YOU HIT UPON THE MAGIC COMBO, RIGHT?!?! [Edit: "No More Mister Nice Guy", by Froborr at the Slacktiverse, kindly re-found by
alexseanchai.]
This is a bad idea. This is not worse than attempting to physically force the outcome (either by direct force, threat of force, drugs, or WHATEVER ELSE THE RAPISTS OF TOMORROW THINK OF), but it is still bad.
Humans are complicated systems. While some mechanical or automated systems don't notice it when the same entity tries and fails to gain access, humans tend to notice these things. Identity is complicated and hard to automatically pin down, but most humans tend to be able to recognize a person who has been making repeated attempts to get in their pants. Most password-protected systems have a timeout to prevent this sort of gaming. Many humans treat that sort of repeated attempt as a threat and shut down all future possibility, even if dude learns incremental backoff.
(Using a varied approach of methods at a rate of three* or fewer per person on a very wide range of potential partners is far less creepy. * Number pulled out of my ass. It may not make people who know you like you better than they did at baseline, but in my book "player" is better than "potential sexual assault".)
Now, trust.
If I actively distrust you, why on earth should I hand you the manual that would make it possible for you to more effectively game my psychological protection suite?
Now, if it happened that someone was doing some specific actions that were contributing to active distrust, like repeated attempts to get in somewhere that they were unwelcome, and they didn't realize that this was causing distrust, it is possible that upon being told "Well, please stop trying to grope me every time we're alone" would cause them to rethink their approach and gain general trustworthiness on that front. But I personally don't always analyze the actions someone else takes that contribute to me not particularly trusting them. It's a lot of quality brain time that I could use on a topic that's more productive or pleasing, and again, why even should I go out of my way to make it easier for someone I distrust to game me?
It's extremely plausible that in more than one case of someone asking me this, the intent was more like "I think you're pretty spiffy. You also seem to know a lot about human interaction. I want to know you better! I want to be friends! I am bad at being friends with humans. Could you help me level up?" Unfortunately, the phrasing "so how do I get you to trust me" pushes the WRONG button inside my black box.
I happen to have trust issues.
I have been asked, more than once, sometimes in these exact words: "What can I do to make you trust me?" This might be a reasonable request to someone who is not me and does not have the same shape of trust issues that I do.
At some point during the last six months, I read a blog post on the way that some people (mostly men) treat attempting to get sex out of a particular woman as a "black box" system that can be gamed: feed enough different inputs into the system, and EVENTUALLY BY THE LAW OF AVERAGES YOU HIT UPON THE MAGIC COMBO, RIGHT?!?! [Edit: "No More Mister Nice Guy", by Froborr at the Slacktiverse, kindly re-found by
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
This is a bad idea. This is not worse than attempting to physically force the outcome (either by direct force, threat of force, drugs, or WHATEVER ELSE THE RAPISTS OF TOMORROW THINK OF), but it is still bad.
Humans are complicated systems. While some mechanical or automated systems don't notice it when the same entity tries and fails to gain access, humans tend to notice these things. Identity is complicated and hard to automatically pin down, but most humans tend to be able to recognize a person who has been making repeated attempts to get in their pants. Most password-protected systems have a timeout to prevent this sort of gaming. Many humans treat that sort of repeated attempt as a threat and shut down all future possibility, even if dude learns incremental backoff.
(Using a varied approach of methods at a rate of three* or fewer per person on a very wide range of potential partners is far less creepy. * Number pulled out of my ass. It may not make people who know you like you better than they did at baseline, but in my book "player" is better than "potential sexual assault".)
Now, trust.
If I actively distrust you, why on earth should I hand you the manual that would make it possible for you to more effectively game my psychological protection suite?
Now, if it happened that someone was doing some specific actions that were contributing to active distrust, like repeated attempts to get in somewhere that they were unwelcome, and they didn't realize that this was causing distrust, it is possible that upon being told "Well, please stop trying to grope me every time we're alone" would cause them to rethink their approach and gain general trustworthiness on that front. But I personally don't always analyze the actions someone else takes that contribute to me not particularly trusting them. It's a lot of quality brain time that I could use on a topic that's more productive or pleasing, and again, why even should I go out of my way to make it easier for someone I distrust to game me?
It's extremely plausible that in more than one case of someone asking me this, the intent was more like "I think you're pretty spiffy. You also seem to know a lot about human interaction. I want to know you better! I want to be friends! I am bad at being friends with humans. Could you help me level up?" Unfortunately, the phrasing "so how do I get you to trust me" pushes the WRONG button inside my black box.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
You don't HAVE to be a Slytherin to recognise that as a question that no-one should ever answer--except perhaps with a big fat lie if a superior asks and you can't get out of answering.
This is related to the fact that I'm always jawdropping when people ask for trigger warnings on posts or fic or art by telling complete strangers how and why they were triggered rather than simply saying "this could be triggering, perhaps you should warn people". I mean why the fuck would I ever tell some random stranger (and anyone who happens to drive by and read the comments) exactly how to ruin my day?
no subject
no subject
Personal trust? ahahahahaha.
no subject
Maybe I parse exact wording too closely, but I think there's a significant difference between "I am trustworthy," and "I want you to think I am trustworthy," and How can I make you trust me leans heavily towards the latter.
(I now have a mental picture of a cartoon villain drawing themselves up in their secret volcanic lair and declaiming, "I compel you to think I am a nice person!" I guess some people just don't see how that sentence is broken?)
no subject
no subject
no subject
On the good side, there's also "Is there anything that you might want me to go slightly out of my way to do, in order to make our contacts harmonious and comfortable"; where the answer might be "the dishes" or "hey, if you're up getting coffee, could you offer to grab me one too?"
Furthermore, I don't get the same bad reaction to a question like "I would like to demonstrate my (appropriate) affection and appreciation for you; what is an appropriate fashion for me to do that?" because not everybody's love language lines up, and love language stuff works for other forms of close contact besides romantic. (And in fact one may have different love language requirements for romantic, platonic, and professional.)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
And if I have no idea whether you're speaking a native language or a fluent non-native language, I'm going to err on the side of protecting my squishy bits because my squishy bits are more important.
But I don't trust very easily. (I am pretty free with a lot of information. It's not trust. It's that you can't hurt me with most of it any more. And most people never realise when you will tell them so much, so freely, that you're keeping anything important to yourself. Camouflage.)
no subject
and then set X as a threshold sufficiently high that if they do all the necessary things to even be able to accomplish X then you will trust them. Or make X impossible.
Assign X as a fuzzy thing, like "treat me like a human being" so that they can't just buy you an apple and "gain your trust".
(for me, anyway, trust is not consciously given, so.)
no subject
It seems unfair of me to burden someone who may well totally be acting in good faith to hold out hope for me granting them trust when I'm pretty sure I won't ever just based on past observation of me. If I'm pretty sure they're acting in good faith, I might well just tell them that I have trust issues and as long as they're treating me like a human being and behaving in a trustworthy fashion, they should carry on doing that regardless.
I am actually reminded of one time where I withdrew access based on how someone had a positive gift for saying exactly the wrong thing with the best intentions in the world. Since the stuff I lock also tends to be the stuff that I'm sensitive about, this was just an amazingly bad scenario that I wanted to stop giving a place to happen.
no subject
My answer is: "Behave in a trustworthy manner for a period of time of undefined, possibly long duration."
If someone lost my trust, then the answer is "Demonstrate that you know why you lost my trust, and then behave in a trustworthy manner for a much longer period of time."
Note, I'm willing to be friendly and in some cases sexy with people I don't trust yet. I'm just not willing to do much stuff outside my comfort zone with them.
Do I have trust issues? Well I know my caution has prevented me from connecting with some people who might have been fun to get to know better. But mostly I think it serves me well.
no subject
no subject