Trusting the People Who Love You

Todd Hayen

You’ve read a lot from me about this topic. How can the people who love you treat you the way they do? This is, of course, assuming you are on this side of things (critical thinkers) and they are on the other (sheep).

Sorry about the “division.” I know a lot of you have said over the years that you don’t like the idea of “sides.” Neither do I. But I think it is pretty obvious there is some sort of division here. Clearly, it is not as distinct as everyone (including me) wants to make it, but if you paint in broad strokes, there are definitely sides. However, I would very much agree that not everyone fits on one side or the other. There are lots of grey areas, thank God.

My article here doesn’t really apply to people in the grey. It is more for people in a relatively clear bucket. Like me. Although I have my grey as well around certain key areas, I stick to clear positions with things like governments forcing vaccines on us (for any reason) or any government calling on action that murders children. Stuff like that.

But even on grey area issues, there are people within families and friend circles who vilify people in a grey area. Take censorship of speech, for example. I think most people are in a grey area with that one. Or the issue of capital punishment. But in these cases, it is a matter of detail. Should there be capital crimes where people lose their lives? Such as murdering children? What seems to be going on today is a zero-tolerance position. Meaning if you set conditions for certain situations, you are hated. Most of us do not do this (some do, of course) but most sheep do.

But this article isn’t even about this. It sort of is, but specifically it is about people who love you (or claim to) not even giving you the benefit of the doubt—not even respecting you enough to “consider you” and consider your position, your beliefs, your warnings, or your view. They don’t have to agree, but they should consider—which means to contemplate, and to think. Seriously.

I have a friend who is a shrew (as any reader of mine knows by now, “shrews” are people who for the most part think outside of the main stream narrative). His wife is a sheep. He begged her not to take the vax when it first came out. Of course, at the time, he did not have a lot of information as to why a person should avoid it, but he felt he had enough factual reason, alongside his general intuitive apprehension. He told her his reasoning, which included a lot of scientific insight.

But she pooh-poohed all that he said. In fact, she called him an idiot for even suggesting something as irresponsible as refusing the vaccine. Now she is very ill. And it is very likely that her illness is related to the shot. Needless to say, she still does not believe the jab has anything to do with her illness. He thinks it does, of course, but he cannot be sure, either.

And it isn’t just the vax. Nearly everything this man says that he has observed about the world, she has issues with. She listens to nothing with any sincerity and discounts everything he comments on. She has zero trust in the man she claims she loves regarding his insight, his intelligence, his common sense, and his ability to discern right from wrong. And she treats him this way.

Obviously, this not only happens with partners, but with family members as well. The strange thing to me about this is that if we love someone, the first thing we must do is trust them. We trust their judgement, we trust that they are looking out for us in the best way they know how, and we believe “the best way they know how” is viable and valid.

We don’t have to agree with them. They always could be wrong, but we trust that what they believe, they sincerely believe, and that they have the genuine intention to do what is right by you. If they didn’t love you, they couldn’t be fully trusted. They would look out for themselves before looking out for you. But if they love you, and you love them, that is not an option.

But this does not seem to be happening in many situations. People do not seem to be listening to what their partners and other loved ones are saying in a sincere way. They do not even question them, they do not think for a moment, “they must have good reason to say this.” But rather, they consider these people who are speaking from a place of love to be fools, conspiracy theorists, or worse.

One of the primary things we seem to have lost during this insanity is trusting the intentions of our loved ones. Again, I do not mean trust in the belief that our loved ones are always correct. There are times for this sort of trust as well, for instance, if you are incapacitated and have lost the ability to make decisions for yourself. Then, at those times, you have to trust your loved ones will catch you when you fall.

But this is a bit different. You may have the capacity to make your own decisions, but you may not have all of the information you require to make a sound one. Even if you believe that you do, and someone you love, and who loves you, says, “no, you haven’t! Listen to what I have to say!” you must pause for a moment and think to yourself, “I should listen to this, it comes from a source I trust, a source that loves me and cares for me.”

But people are not doing this.

People are being taught not to trust love. There are a lot of ways to do this. We see it in the media, in movies and on television, love is not to be trusted. Men are certainly not to be trusted (are there more women who do not listen to men than the other way around?)

Maybe this is a long shot to say, but it is certainly an intention of the agenda to break trust with anyone except who or what the agenda says we should trust. We are not supposed to make any decisions at all without the agenda’s approval. So, with this twisted understanding, something as “unscientific” as love—partner love or family love—should never be trusted.

Todd Hayen PhD is a registered psychotherapist practicing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He holds a PhD in depth psychotherapy and an MA in Consciousness Studies. He specializes in Jungian, archetypal, psychology. Todd also writes for his own substack, which you can read here