We all have a frame of reference for what we think is acceptable. It contains the norms around conversations we have, the language we use (and others use when talking to us) and what we accept both form ourselves and others. It also includes the things we the feelings we think we are allowed to have and show.
What’s interesting is how these boundaries came to be differ from one person to another and what they can teach us.
At a point in time we may fight tooth and nail to defend what we feel is not given to us (the irony) and hold our boundaries like the first line of defence against an alien invasion.
Years later we may have come to question the rightfulness of our boundaries and try to see what it’s like behind the limiting wall of principles that don’t seem to suit us. And so we invite ‘the other side’ in, take off our armour and open our gates. Of course this can be rocky territory, especially when we have not yet realized our true preferences and what really suits us. Opening these gates of perceived certainty (I am like this, I like this, I want this) may feel like an invasion at the beginning but can be an important step in defining what we actually like. This time based on who we really want to be and not on coping mechanisms and examples from others.
And at other times we may hold the line again, this time a bit more open than before, defending what we think to have gained from opening up earlier. And so we are in a constant battle between defending our principles and doubts about much they serve us.
The way to end this battle is to completely beyond it;
Richard Buckminister Fuller once said that we don’t solve our problems on the same level of consciousness that created them. We simple have to make them obsolete. And we do this by deciding want we want and who we are, without any regards to defending, letting go, past ways of acting or ideas or how we should incorporate any of this into our lives. We decide, feel and act is if everything is already like that.