I’m a fairly risk-taking individual. I’m not at all showy or badass about it, because it’s not about status or social cachet for me; I’m just personally happier knowing that I have the freedom to try new things, mess up, and learn. When I accrue adverse consequences for the risks I take, I suck it up and deal. I’m not much one to play the victim or point fingers, when I willingly chose to accept a certain level of uncertainty and not-guaranteed safety.
For whatever reason, I’ve often found the social circles I’ve run in populated by no small number of fairly risk-averse people. (I’m a medical doctor.) I make a lot of people worry vicariously for me, without trying. And I hate this. I find it kind of patronizing and disrespectful; as Billy Joel sang, “I don’t need you to worry for me cause I’m all right / I don’t need you to tell me it’s time to come home / I don’t care what they say anymore, this is my life / Go ahead with your own life, leave me alone!”
This becomes socially problematic when I sense that fairly risk-averse people in my life don’t fully trust me to do the right thing without supervision, in a way that reassures them they don’t have to check my work and stay “on me”.
Is risk-aversity (or “uncertainty avoidance”, as Prof Geert Hofstede put it) something that two close people with a trusting relationship can differ on markedly and complement each other on? Or is this a personality trait people really need to be on the same page about, if they want to remain stably close?
3 comments
You don’t want too much separation in that department. I guess it would depend on the risks we’re talking about.
Not super as long as both people agree and adhere to limits that have been chosen together.
For example, this may be handled in a way where commonly owned property and savings are not permitted without both parties agreeing. Having personal accounts alongside common ones would help.
This may be extended to commonly agreed to social limits (like not permitting your partner to kiss others or have sex with others).
You many benefit from asking yourself the reverse – how willing are you to consider that when you are in a stable long term relationship your decisions and consequences will no longer be only your own since they now affect and can potentially mentally, financially and physically ruin the other person. What do you consider to be the maximum level of discomfort you are willing to be causing your partner if you gamble on something you shouldn’t have and lost?
Long term partnerships just come down to together finding a common ground. Whatever form this takes is down to the specific individuals.
I tend to greatly favor comfort so wouldn’t want to be with someone who carelessly makes me unfortable by not being considerate.
Extremely important.
As a risk taking individual myself, sometimes I’m with my closest friends and out of nowhere I get a extremely lonely feeling when I think of doing something risky or trying something new and I know I would be bombarded with worried voices and instant disagreement.
Most of the time they are fine. They have accepted me as I am but are not willing to participate with my decisions. They have different roles in my life. Usually these people take care of me, when I’m with them I don’t make decisions, let them take care of it so I can act as childish and relax as much as I want.
Fine with me, but when it comes to personal belief about life choices I try to find people who are ready to do it all as I would. I don’t have to worry about restricting myself, I can go all out with them. I find they also understand me more than others would, I feel safe and in positive attitude around them beacuse I know I don’t have to deal with distrust from them. Makes it a little less lonely while doing things too.
I would definitely like people like these as my best friend, life partner because there is no stable relationship without trust.