OK, we can explain it. You are a virgin and never married etc. but even in an imperfect marriage when a man and a woman have stayed together a long time, over 20 years, they have what's called a bond. This can cause these things we call human emotions to..? Complete the sentence.
I actually thought Will Smith was going to rob Chris Rock. Maybe it was a robbery gone bad. I’m sure Will Smith was pacing heat.
As much as I respect your usually in-depth and thoughtful posts, my opinion on this matter remains unchanged. In human and even animal interactions, effective communication often manifests itself into better quality of life for the challenged party, sometimes over an extended period of time than would otherwise be the case. Effective communication can include what you said the appropriate response for Will Smith was, certainly. Effective communication can also include varying levels of aggression depending on particular circumstances. For example, if you told someone about a red line before and they continue to cross that line, it is reasonable to attach consequences to that and future transgressions to deter such offensive behavior. In the case of a public interaction, how the challenged party deals with a situation can make or break the challenged’s reputation for a lifetime. If one deals with a situation too weakly, that person will likely face challenges by other parties in the future. In is generally not appropriate to apply disproportionate force on a first transgression unless it is seriously outrageous according to social norms. An individual who is too predictable in their responses and/or who is never willing to respond to situations in a certain way is exploitable in human interactions. There are predators out there, including political leaders, scam artists, mechanics, etc., who will purposely challenge people as a test in order determine whether a financial gain or influential advantage can be garnered. Anytime you hear someone who floats a trial balloon that involves an obvious lie, exaggeration, or an indirect threat of some kind, usually in a joking manner, that person has targeted you for exploitation. Such a challenge needs be answered appropriately to get them to either move on or to change their tune. Let’s explore some memorable moments in history involving noted politicians in competitive events as some examples in support of what I’m saying. First up is Trump, in general, and the interaction between Trump and Jeb Bush in the 2016 Republican primaries. Notice how Trump usually has a depreciating name for his political opponents? This simple, albeit socially questionable act, has helped Trump to establish himself as pack leader because no one successfully challenged him. A leader is often seen as the one who gives others names. Jeb Bush tried to challenge Trump at one of the debates, but Trump had already anticipated his response, called it out, and successfully countered Jeb’s challenge within a minute or two, if that. Successfully countering the premeditated challenges by another is a skill that too few aspiring politicians seem to have. Putin’s “Threats” to use nuclear weapons is another example of an attempt to gain concessions from his opponents without having to directly risk resources of various types. Even though Putin was playing a dangerous game involving his credibility should a true red line be crossed, if NATO didn’t ignore his threat, at least to some extent, Putin would have completely isolated Ukraine from Western weapons and supplies. Even puppies respond appropriately to social transgressions. According to a study, puppies have an innate “Sense of justice” involving interactions with one another. For example, during play, a puppy may accidentally hurt another. Normal behavior by the offending party upon hearing a whelp is to assume a submissive posture as an apology. In the case of the offending party not apologizing, especially if the offender continues biting too hard, he becomes ostracized from the group. In a study involving wolves, even an established pack became fatally injured after the pack turned on her for unrelenting long term abuse on the pack’s members. One other thought to consider when you are defending a third party, such as your significant other from an attack is that attack on your significant other is an attack on you. Also, I’d say most are critically evaluating how well you defend them, whether they will admit it out loud or not. In other words, don’t let challenges against you or your family go unanswered. So while we may not be privy to the whole history of Will Smith’s involvement with Chris Rock or his true motivation for what he did, certainly what Will actually did is in the realm of reasonable responses to Chris Rock’s apparent transgression(s). Again, in our sometimes dog-eat-dog world out there, best to be not too predictable or having too narrow of a range of responses involving challenges by others. By extension, best to not read too much into a outside conflict unless most, if not all, details are known.
Chris Rock Smooths Things Over With Will Smith By Sleeping With His Wife https://babylonbee.com/news/chris-rock-smooths-things-over-with-will-smith-by-sleeping-with-his-wife