Trust or self interest - which counts for more?

[lee36044]

Here is a topic to kick around. I began thinking about this when a thread on male friends caught my interest. Sometimes you run across a topic that makes you really think and this one brought out some stuff that has me wondering.

I'll preface this with a summary of what I think I know. I believe trust is an artificial concept. Although I never formulated it ... I've always believed that the concepts of attraction, interest levels, and compatibility determined the success or failure of a relationship. A lot of the same things so often discussed on here.

My life experience also seems to have shown me that most women have no integrity unless said integrity fulfills their current emotional needs. It seems that trust is something that isn't needed when interest levels are high and is something that is only a handicap when interest levels are low!

When interest levels are high ... you are seen as the prize. Her integrity will be flawless because it is in her best interest not to lose the prize. When interest levels are low ... she can only be trusted for one thing .... to seek out what fulfills her emotional needs. Have I missed something here? Is trust just a debating point used to justify unnaceptable behaviors? In the business world ... trust is earned. In most group endeavors trust must be earned. But in a relationship ... trust must be given blindly from the outset!

Where does trust fit into the DJ outlook? Is trust, blind trust, just an AFC phenomena? Or is trust just a construct we use in an attempt to control through appealing to their self image of being a person of integrity? Is trust even a factor or is it really all about interest level?

Any thoughts?

 

[JC9]

In the business world ... trust is earned. In most group endeavors trust must be earned. But in a relationship ... trust must be given blindly from the outset!

Any thoughts?

I view trust in a relationship the same as a trust in business or between friends.

Trust is based on actions, and is always earned. Once earned, it is maintained by the continuation of actions that you view as trustworthy.

You shouldn't blindly trust anyone, man or woman.

 

[Latinoman]

Trust is based on actions, and is always earned. Once earned, it is maintained by the continuation of actions that you view as trustworthy.

True....but, what make you think that her actions were due to self-interest? Like Lee described originally. I KNOW a LOT of women that become "Saints", just because they want to alure a particular man to keep them for very LTR or even marriage. But, then revert back to their past behavior when things start not going her way (combined with her losing some interest). The Hybernation phenomenum.

 

[Sir Drinksalot]

then revert back to their past behavior when things start not going her way (combined with her losing some interest). The Hybernation phenomenum.

Very good point... This has been my observation too. Once the man is locked down in a relationship he can't walk away from easily, she comes out of hibernation. She is who she is, past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior.

On the trust issue, trust being from the outset I think is not real. AFCs often say "I trust you," but this is said to shut the woman up and keep her around. They don't trust her as far as they could throw a tractor trailer.

Furthermore, if a woman EVER starts harping on this with lines like "why don't you trust me?" "I want you to trust me," or "trust is the most important part of our relationship," watch your back. She's either doing about to really do a number on you.

Such phrases should bring the same suspicion and dread as "open your mouth and close your eyes and soon you'll get a big surprise."

 

[JC9]

True....but, what make you think that her actions were due to self-interest? Like Lee described originally. I KNOW a LOT of women that become "Saints", just because they want to alure a particular man to keep them for very LTR or even marriage. But, then revert back to their past behavior when things start not going her way (combined with her losing some interest). The Hybernation phenomenum.

That's why the trust must continue to be earned.

If the girl has high interest level and acts like a 'Saint' you can trust her as long as she acts that same way.

If her interest level plummets and her actions change and she starts doing things you don't view as trustworthy, she no longer has your trust and you act accordingly.

But that's everyone to some degree. We all serve our own interests first and foremost.

Here's a good example. I was talking with a woman, and the topic of going to clubs/bars while in a relationship came up.

When she was married she never went out to clubs, even when her husband was gone for weeks at a time for business.

She said it was like cheating to go to a club because she knew how she acted when she was drunk and dancing. From her description, she had real high IL in her husband and loved him, but in the end he divorced her.

Fast forward to her dating a new guy. They had been in a relationship for like 5 months, and she went out to the bars and clubs with her friends 2-3 nights a week. She trashed the guy at every opportunity in our conversation, had super super low IL in him and thought of him as a total ***** (her words).

Same woman, two scenario's. Her husband would have been right to trust her while he was away, because her actions were congruent with his trust. BF should not trust her at all, because her actions are not congruent with his trust.

I just don't see trust, or any behavior really, as having some different set of rules when your in a 'relationship' than when your not.

Very good point... This has been my observation too. Once the man is locked down in a relationship he can't walk away from easily, she comes out of hibernation. She is who she is, past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior.

True to a point. Women are emotional creatures, their feelings are the core of their behaviors. So if a woman starts to adopt your interests or enjoy all the things you enjoy it can often be because she enjoys the feeling of doing those activities around or with you, and not some conspiratorial plot to get you to commit to her.

 

[Latinoman]

If the girl has high interest level and acts like a 'Saint' you can trust her as long as she acts that same way.

If her interest level plummets and her actions change and she starts doing things you don't view as trustworthy, she no longer has your trust and you act accordingly.

And that is MY point. Those kind of women take a lot of work to keep interested. You will have to sacrifice a lot of things in life to pay LOT of attention to them. And while you are doing that...they will continue to become the "Saint", because they are happy. After all...YOUR world revolves around them.

Okay, so...let's say you marry her under the false premise that she is a "Saint". Then have children...and buy a 1 Million dollar home...and your career start blossoming (note: which means that you would have to work longer hours and perhaps travel more).

Do you think you could sustain her "interst level high"? I mean...in order to get your career blossoming, you MUST make some sacrifices (e.g. travel more, work longer hours). In a nutshell...she will stop becoming the world where you are continuously orbiting. You will have to make some minor adjustments...and THEN she will start losing interest.

Then what? Even if you start losing trust for her...what can you do? Would you be able to walk away (child support, 1 Million Home, 50% split, etc.)?

When things go 100% well for her...of course you can expect a woman to behave like a Saint. But when things start NOT going her way? That's the true test to committment. Read the other thread I put on the "Desperate Housewives" Syndrome: http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=115968

 

[JC9]

And that is MY point. Those kind of women take a lot of work to keep interested. You will have to sacrifice a lot of things in life to pay LOT of attention to them. And while you are doing that...they will continue to become the "Saint", because they are happy. After all...YOUR world revolves around them.

I don't agree with your basic premise.

You don't have to pay a lot of attention to a woman to have her have high IL.

Your WORLD does not revolve around them.

Your WORLD revolves around what you enjoy doing with your life, with your hobbies, with your work.

Women come and go from your orbit.

They stay as long as they are happy being around you because of who you are. Trying to do things specifically for the purpose of keeping them happy is a waste of time.

I do agree on the marriage thing. It's a high risk deal. No matter what woman you choose to marry, there is a very high possibility that either you or her will go in different directions as your life progresses.

 

[Latinoman]

I don't agree with your basic premise.

You don't have to pay a lot of attention to a woman to have her have high IL.

True...ONLY if

1- we are not dealing with a woman that used to be a slut. Because to keep a slut under the hibernation spell (and it can be done), it would take a LOT of work from a DJ. Making him neglect other things.

and

2- you are NOT in a VERY LONG TERM relationship (you might get away with this during the first month or even year...can you sustain it for the next 5 years?)

Your WORLD does not revolve around them.

Exactly my point.

Your WORLD revolves around what you enjoy doing with your life, with your hobbies, with your work.

Women come and go from your orbit.

Well...if you make a mistake and marry one of them (and have their children)...then the "go" becomes VERY VERY hard.

They stay as long as they are happy being around you because of who you are.

Trying to do things specifically for the purpose of keeping them happy is a waste of time.

That's also my point. But if you choose one in hibernation...then that's the ONLY way you can keep her that way.

Remember...I'm bringing to the attention the fact that you can perhaps THINK you might trust a woman based on a fascade she might have in order to cover her true nature (maybe she is truly trying to change - but you cannot change nature-, especially after she has done things that have challenged the elasticity of her morality).

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Trust is not Desire.

Recently I’ve been reading about the importance of Interest Levels in attraction and how useful a skill it is to accurately make assessments of interest in inter-gender communications when in the field. Ross Jefferies and David D’Angelo continually press upon the need for determining IL and quantify it in percentage points as well as qualifying it under varying circumstance. However, IL remains this nebulous X factor that qualifies or disqualifies a man from for a woman’s intimacy. I’ve read long discourses on ways to raise IL (such as establishing rapport) or techniques in maintaining IL over the course of an LTR, but hardly a word on what determines IL from the outset.

In my counseling I never advocate becoming a woman’s friend and then attempting to move to intimacy. Social conditioning has taught most women that the “friendship route” should be the best way to become intimate with a man, yet as we’ve experienced more often than not that this ‘safe route’ is rarely the one that leads to a lasting intimacy. We constantly hear women (and now men unfortunately) parrot the same response of becoming ‘friends first’ and then shifting to more intimate relations. In my own estimation this is yet another psycho-social convention effectively used by women in their sexual selection process; the latent purpose of which is meant to determine sexual acceptability while retaining the man’s attention (something she seeks for affirmation purposes). The problem with this line of reasoning is that this very convention diffuses what I call the Desire Dynamic – a necessary ingredient in any relationship, LTR or otherwise.

Think back to the experiences you’ve had in clubs or other social occasions where you’ve met a woman with whom you simply ‘clicked’. As some will attest, this initial ‘chemical reaction’ to each other is an overpowering physical passion (some would say lust). Some may result in a ONS, others may be the start of an LTR, but the result isn’t what I’m onto here, it’s that the desire is there. IL is simply a quantification of basic desire. Some of the hottest, most spontaneous sexual encounters we have are the result of this primary desire.

It should be noted that some guys may have never experienced this and will readily call attention to the lack of ever having experiences such as this and have in fact turned their female friends into lovers. In these instances there is still a basic desire, but not to the chemical reaction degree as I’ve stated above. Mitigating factors may exist in these instances where a friend becomes the ‘lover of second choice’ or the guy’s game is such that he’s never had the occasion to experience it. All exceptions aside, the desire for one another must exist and the degree to which it does will determine the quality of that experience or that relationship.

In their initial assessment of IL, I’ll have to agree with Jefferies and D’Angelo so far that determining the intensity of a woman’s interest is a determining factor in becoming intimate. However, I think that an even more important skill for a man to develop is accurately assessing IL through the course of a relationship as well, and developing techniques with which to maintain it. Most men generally complain of a lack of desire on the part of their wives after marriage. Things ‘cool off’ and the real desire declines on her part. Through routine, convenience or any number of other factors the passion both had in the beginning is traded for security with her and the convenience of a regular sex partner for him. Both make concessions for each other in order to maintain what has now become comfortable. But the problem with desire is that it is necessarily uncomfortable, it is non-routine and spontaneous. The butterflies in her stomach are there because she isn’t in control of her circumstance – a security she would otherwise strive for. I can’t tell of the countless articles I’ve read by women attempting to explain why men cheat on their spouses/girlfriends, but none of them address this basic desire principle. Rather it’s explained as a man’s biological imperative to seek variety in his breeding selection, and while there is some merit to this, I would argue that what a man seeks in his infidelity is a return to this degree of passion. His need to experience this desire becomes such that he will seek it outside of marriage if the opportunity permits. And I shouldn’t limit this strictly to men; women are equally affected by this principle.

Many times I’ve counseled married men after they or their wives have been caught in extramarital affairs and pop psychology would have us believe that the two need to “build back the trust they once shared” but, this line of thought, I believe is egregiously in error. It takes no account of any mutually shared desire that the couple had (or didn’t have) prior to the offense. To put it bluntly, if a woman is a dead lay for her husband or a man is so overweight as to not be arousing for his wife, no amount of ‘trust building’ will compensate for a basic lack of desire. It’s not trust that is lacking in failing relationships -it’s desire. Pop culture ignorantly tells us we have to keep things fresh to keep a relationship going: roleplay, go get fashion shots, have a date night and any number of other ideas meant to recapture this passion, yet never is it discussed the lack of desire to do things such as this. I would argue that if a couple needs to recapture this sense of spontaneity and passion, the problem exists in the desire dynamic and may well be past due. Rather I would encourage couples (men in particular) to maintain a constant sense of spontaneity and unpredictability in this regard throughout an LTR.

Holding fast to DJ principles in a marriage or LTR is a good start. DJ skills and ideology (what I call positive masculinity) can serve a man well into marriage so long as the man internalizes them and lives them out. Too many times do AFCs use methodologies and formulae to acquire the woman of his choosing only to settle into ‘getting comfortable’ in a relationship and regress back to being an AFC, because he never internalized the value of being a true DJ. Again a desire for who you were is evident in the woman, but a pale desire (if at all) for who you regress into after you’ve become intimates is a recipe for disaster.

 

[JC9]

True...ONLY if

1- we are not dealing with a woman that used to be a slut. Because to keep a slut under the hibernation spell (and it can be done), it would take a LOT of work from a DJ. Making him neglect other things.

and

2- you are NOT in a VERY LONG TERM relationship (you might get away with this during the first month or even year...can you sustain it for the next 5 years?)

I guess the above points are something I don't understand.

Point 1) If the woman was a slut and untrustworthy how long would she hang around in 'hibernation' mode if you didn't make her your focus in life.

1 yr, 2 yrs, 3 yrs? Indefinitely until you 'commit' to her, and then she magically transforms?

Point 2) Say you are in a long term relationship, and at 3 years you can no longer maintain her high IL without sacrificing other things.

Why not just end the relationship and move on.

If you have to work for the specific purpose of maintaining a girls IL, it's time to move on.

The caveat to the above, of course, is if you are married.

But I don't see the point in people getting married. Even if you found a girl who was the purest, virginal saint that every walked the face of the earth you are still at risk of her (or you) wanting something different in your lives later.

Relationships are transient things. Let them end when they have run their course, rather than fighting tooth and nail to maintain what once was.

 

[realsmoothie]

Interesting stuff... but I'll respond to one point in the original post.

My life experience also seems to have shown me that most women have no integrity unless said integrity fulfills their current emotional needs. It seems that trust is something that isn't needed when interest levels are high and is something that is only a handicap when interest levels are low!

Are you saying that only women do this? Come on. How many times have you seen a guy fool around with his friend's girlfriend just because she was there and drunk?

I'd say that interest levels work both ways. Let's say your girlfriend (or whatever) isn't satisfying you sexually... and you're at the bar and some chick is hammered and HOT and telling you how much she wants to suck you off... hrm.

For that matter... how many times has a country made friends with another and then turned their back... i.e. (perfect example, I love it) the USA and Saddam Hussein? He was great for us back in the 80's... the US (i.e. the older Bush) gave him all manner of military and financial support... but in the 1990's when he started doing things the US didn't like we went "uh, wait a minute... INVADE YOU!"

All of this doesn't invalidate the question of whether intrest levels have an impact on "integrity"... I just wanted to point out that gender has little to do with it. Now, if you want to explore how women's supposedly more emotional natures affect WHEN and HOW they cheat, that's another thing... and that appears to be what is being discussed.

 

[lee36044]

Are you saying that only women do this? Come on. How many times have you seen a guy fool around with his friend's girlfriend just because she was there and drunk?

I'd say that interest levels work both ways. Let's say your girlfriend (or whatever) isn't satisfying you sexually... and you're at the bar and some chick is hammered and HOT and telling you how much she wants to suck you off... hrm.

I think I said in the beginninng ... I believe trust is an artificial construct. Perhaps I should have elaborated. GUYS DO IT TOO! You can always trust the guy afraid of being caught! Right up until his interest level falls to where he doesn't care!

For that matter... how many times has a country made friends with another and then turned their back... i.e. (perfect example, I love it) the USA and Saddam Hussein? He was great for us back in the 80's... the US (i.e. the older Bush) gave him all manner of military and financial support... but in the 1990's when he started doing things the US didn't like we went "uh, wait a minute... INVADE YOU!"

According to a character in a Tom Clancy novel ... this is called international relations: one country fvcking another!

All of this doesn't invalidate the question of whether intrest levels have an impact on "integrity"... I just wanted to point out that gender has little to do with it. Now, if you want to explore how women's supposedly more emotional natures affect WHEN and HOW they cheat, that's another thing... and that appears to be what is being discussed.

Yes it does seem to be. But I think my whole basic question was what role does trust play if any in the DJ lifestyle. Is there ever really any point where you can close your eyes and say with perfect certainty "I can trust my partner unconditionally"?

 

[lee36044]

Trust is not Desire.

------deleted to shorten ----------

I think that an even more important skill for a man to develop is accurately assessing IL through the course of a relationship as well, and developing techniques with which to maintain it.

------- more deleted -----------

I would argue that if a couple needs to recapture this sense of spontaneity and passion, the problem exists in the desire dynamic and may well be past due. Rather I would encourage couples (men in particular) to maintain a constant sense of spontaneity and unpredictability in this regard throughout an LTR.

Holding fast to DJ principles in a marriage or LTR is a good start. DJ skills and ideology (what I call positive masculinity) can serve a man well into marriage so long as the man internalizes them and lives them out. Too many times do AFCs use methodologies and formulae to acquire the woman of his choosing only to settle into ‘getting comfortable’ in a relationship and regress back to being an AFC, because he never internalized the value of being a true DJ. Again a desire for who you were is evident in the woman, but a pale desire (if at all) for who you regress into after you’ve become intimates is a recipe for disaster.

Excellent post as usual Rollo

I think this is partly what I was getting at. The point is that it nothing seems to matter if one of the partners is "unfulfilled", what I tend to call interest levels being low. Lack of desire is probably the more appropriate term. The only thing you can trust an unhappy partner to do is find happiness ... usually somewhere else.

The question remains .. does trust have any place in the DJ outlook? Or is it more a matter of not displaying distrustfulness while keeping your eyes open for indicators of low interest / desire?

 

[lee36044]

That's why the trust must continue to be earned.

If the girl has high interest level and acts like a 'Saint' you can trust her as long as she acts that same way.

I don't mean to nitpick but isn't this more a matter of not seeming distrustful than truly trusting someone?

 

[lee36044]

Looks like I put the cart before the horse here How about this? Does anyone have a good solid definition of trust as applied to a DJ relationship? Is there any unconditional element to it? Is it a matter of letting her feel you trust her while maintaining watchfulness? How should a DJ define, and extend trust?

 

[JC9]

Looks like I put the cart before the horse here How about this? Does anyone have a good solid definition of trust as applied to a DJ relationship? Is there any unconditional element to it? Is it a matter of letting her feel you trust her while maintaining watchfulness? How should a DJ define, and extend trust?

As you can see from the other posts there are various views.

Mine is that trust is never unconditional, and that it is based on the actions of the person you extend the trust to.

You extend as much trust as their actions merit.

An example from my own life. One of my friends has problems with drugs and alchohol.

When he is in AA and sober I can trust him to repay loans, to borrow my car, housesit, whatever. When he falls off the wagon, I can trust him with none of those things.

That is because his actions while sober are those of a responsible individual, and an when he is not his actions become irresponsible.

In a DJ relationship it should be the same.

 

[joekerr31]

ok, its very rare, but im going to sort of (emphasize sort of) disagree with rollo on this one.

desire is very important BUT what i believe is even more important is the degree to which two persons belief systems overlap.

they say opposites attract - perhaps when it comes to lust this is true. but for a long term happy relationship the key is compatible belief systems.

this is also at the crux of trust. if your woman believes in different things than you, and the gap is big enough, you will not have a trusting relationship. a trusting relationship requires that you, in a sense, KNOW what the other person is thinking, what they are capable of and how they react to certain stimuli.

mutual understand is the first step towards trust.

but you might say - wait a second, i think difference are good. i dont want a woman who acts like me.

difference in tone, physique, etc are good, i agree. but difference in beliefs are not. if you believe in god and she doesn't - not good. if she's a republican and your a democrat - not good. if she's a humanist and your a capitalist - not good. if she's a reader and your a movie buff - not good. if she holds it in and takes it out on you later, while you like to argue and get it over with - not good.

all relationships have some "not good" in them, but stack enough of them up and its serious trouble long term on the trust front.

now, the reason these things are not good is that it neither party truly feels like they know what the other is thinking, or might due. the others behaviors (and underlying beliefs) are so different than there own that its impossible to fully trust.

now on the flip side. take a man and woman who both believe in god, both are democrats, both believe in resolving conflict when it arises, both are readers, etc. because of the overlap in beliefs and reactions to events it becomes VERY easy for each to read each other and to know if something is "off".

the simplest way to have a trusting relationship with someone else is 1) to be trust worthy yourself and 2) to hook up with people who share the same types of beliefs that you do.

the problem in this world is that most people have no f*cking clue what they believe. their lives are not governed by any real principles other than self interest.

and can you trust someone who cares primarily about self interest? no, you can't. that's when you get into this debate about IL. which is really saying nothing more than if her IL is high enough then its in her own self interest to want you.

i believe however that the best predictor of trust is beliefs. its still not full proof, but its pretty darn close.

i believe you can trust a woman IF she has a set of beliefs and subsequent conscience that make it difficult for her to lie, cheat and put her own self interest above the mutual interest of the relationship. additional, provided you have similar likes and dislikes overall in life, you're looking at a great long term marriage.

this is what i call a mature woman.

90% of the women in the world aren't evil per say, but can you trust them carte blanche over say a 1 year period? Absolutely not. they are only as trust worthy as their IL - which is tied back once again to their own self interest.

see, the whole "soulmate" thing is really nothing more than an overlap of ideals and beliefs. provide a bare minimum level of desire and attraction is present, compatible beliefs will keep a relationship together with minimal effort. these are the lottery winners that society scratches their heads over asking 'how did they get such a perfect marriage?"

trust is possible, but only as a result of belief systems wherein virtue is held in the highest regard by BOTH people. trust is impossible when the bond that ties two people together is desire (which will eventually wane at some point), fear, insecurity, practicality, etc.

i do believe that the best marriages are scenarios where the man and woman do consider each other as each others best friends. i believe that occurs as a result of shared beliefs and subsequently a shared life experience.

the problem today, as stated already, is that most people dont know who they are, were fed madonna and the cartoons growing up, and wouldn't recognize hte traits of a mature virtuous person if it bite them on the *ss.

in our secular, hedonistic, neurotic, self absorbed, rat race of a culture is it any wonder that so few people can truly be trusted. not to mention all the effort feminists, chauvanists, the media, islamists, etc. have put into convincing us all that men and women are completely different creatures. this is bullsh*t. yes, we are different, but there are just as many women who believe in honesty and respect etc as there are men - and in both camps the numbers are a minority of society.

and i can tell you this much as well. when i've had a shared overlap in beliefs with a woman, things flow smoothly and she'll do anything to please me (in or outside of the bedroom). unfortunately i haven't found a woman where that overlap has been great enough to lead to marriage. but its possible ill find that still. but i'd never marry a woman just because i thought she was super hot - bang her sure - but marry, or even trust? no way.

 

[Latinoman]

I guess the above points are something I don't understand.

Point 1) If the woman was a slut and untrustworthy how long would she hang around in 'hibernation' mode if you didn't make her your focus in life.

1 yr, 2 yrs, 3 yrs? Indefinitely until you 'commit' to her, and then she magically transforms?

Many times when things don't start going her way. In a NON-marriage, typically what she might do is either find another man (and THEN dump you) or cheat on you.

However, the odds are considerably higher if you are married or if you have children.

Point 2) Say you are in a long term relationship, and at 3 years you can no longer maintain her high IL without sacrificing other things.

Why not just end the relationship and move on.

Because I'm talking about marriage with children situations. And under those particular circunstances, it is very hard to simply move on.

But I don't see the point in people getting married.

You don't. But many men do. And my point is directed to the general population. Furthermore, you don't have to be married to have children. That (children) is what truly complicates things.

Relationships are transient things. Let them end when they have run their course, rather than fighting tooth and nail to maintain what once was.

Once again...I was referring to marriage with children.

 

[Latinoman]

Looks like I put the cart before the horse here How about this? Does anyone have a good solid definition of trust as applied to a DJ relationship? Is there any unconditional element to it? Is it a matter of letting her feel you trust her while maintaining watchfulness? How should a DJ define, and extend trust?

Here is how I deal (or would recommend) with this issue... Now, I am not saying that those are the actual % that I'm currently dealing (e.g. I have no mother or wife). But that would be the maximum amount that I would personally recommend.

Peers, Subordinates, Supervisors
I can trust (might not have a choice) somebody to do a job if that person is part of my team and have earned my trust by the way that person does the job. And my trust could be nearly 100% if the person truly needs the job, has the qualifications, experience, and has proven (eg. great reputation) to be great at the job.

Girlfriend, lover
The MOST I can trust anyone in this category is 80%. In another words, when I tell my girlfriend, "I trust you"...in my mind it is translated: "I trust you a maximum of 80%".

Wife
The maximum possible amount in this case is 90% (if she happens to be the mother of my children and happen to have earned that trust after YEARS -e.g. +10- of trusthworthy behavior). So, when I use the term, "I trust my wife"...it can actually be translated: "I trust my wife to the maximum possible scale, which is 90%".

Friend

The maximum would be 80% too.

Myself
100%.

Now...note that the "maximum" in all of them is under the assumption that they have proven to be trustworthy for YEARS and YEARS (or in the girlfriend/lover part...after several months). It is not authomatic. It is simply the maximum possible trust that I could develop or recommend people to develop under the PERFECT scenarios (e.g. years of proven trutworthiness from those people).

 

[( . )( . )]

Good post lee, looks like you got a good idea of how things work.

Where does trust fit into the DJ outlook? Is trust, blind trust, just an AFC phenomena?

I believe so, any guy who thinks creatures who are guided by reaction and emotion are trustworthy in the sense our male brain interprets the meaning of "trust" would be seriously deluding himself. Remember though this is not a slur against females but simply stating the nature of the beast.

Is trust even a factor or is it really all about interest level?

Interest level without a doubt.