A man yells at the cashier for getting his order wrong, causing quite the scene in the fast food joint.
He embarrasses his family and gives the wrong impression of himself.
The remarks of others in the place think “is he crazy?” or “I feel bad for his poor wife”.
The man is in fact a good man, husband and father.
The man is undergoing both financial and work related stress.
On top of those two issues, he’s also undergoing serious health problems.
He did not act like the man he truly is in this moment in front of everyone, however those who don’t see him on a regular basis or don’t know him well, see him in a bad light.
A child is being abused and neglected at home.
The child goes to school, does poorly with schoolwork, gets into fights and even yells at a teacher.
The child appears to be very disobedient as well as aggressive.
The summers the child spends at their grandparents place, the child is docile, fun, and helpful.
Those that see this child during the school year when they are residing in an abusive home, do not see the behaved side of the child.
In both of these examples, both individuals are not bad people.
Both people are at fault for expressing their frustrations in nonconstructive ways.
The father in this case is an adult and should be more aware of his stressors, thus seeking help for these issues.
However maybe he needed a gentle voice encouraging him and guiding him to get help.
The child is not fully to blame, as they are in an abusive situation.
The child is most likely scared to share about the abuse, let alone confront it, so their frustrations comes out at school.
Someone in an authoritative position should recognize the signs and offer help as well as support.
Now, we  can perceive both these individuals in these separate situations as rude, somewhat aggressive, inappropriate and an embarrassment.
When in reality these two individuals aren’t bad people at all, they are reacting from their difficult situations.
It does not excuse their behavior, yet it does offer anyone that’s intelligent a glimpse into why they are the way they are.
If we don’t dig deeper into why people are the way they are, we offer no solution except to draw our own unprofessional opinions.
That is how gossip and rumors are started.
The world doesn’t need more of that, the world needs more people to be compassionate and understanding.
We need people to be slower to speak and quicker to listen.
A man is wealthy, dresses nice, kind, good looking, calm, well liked, respected and friendly.
This man however, lies about his taxes, tricks people into buying overly priced products, has repeatedly been unfaithful to his wife, doesn’t pay his ex wife child support and when he is alone drinks heavily to escape himself.
From an outside perspective this man has it all together, if there’s ever wrong doing he is the victim, no one has any reason to doubt his influence.
He’s extremely good at lying not only to others, but more concernedly, himself.
In reality, this individual is actually more dangerous versus the man yelling at the fast food place or the child that lashes out at their teacher.
The reason this individual is so dangerous is because his anger is all inward anger. It’s like a ticking time bomb, he masks his pain with whatever he can get his hands on.
The man in the fast food place and the child are upset, however don’t repress any hidden, illegal or concerning issues within themselves.
People tend to only see people by their outward appearances.
Society needs to do a better job at not basing their opinions by their first, only or random encounters with people.
The well dressed man in my last example drives into the back of a car.
The man in my first example that created a scene at the fast  food place was hit hard.
Witnesses pull over to help in the situation.
The well dressed man, we’ll call him Joe, is in shock he hit the back of a vehicle.
He had gotten into some minor fender benders in the past and was able to get out of those without consequence.
He had also been in a couple big accidents, both times he was able to again, escape consequence either by the help of a lawyer or paying the victims off.
He premeditated that this time he would again, get out of this situation just like all the other times.
The man that left the fast food place, we will call him Bob, he was also in shock having not been in an accident in years.
He had been in an accident years prior, he did a hit and run.
He tried to make amends years later having the victim forgive him and excuse him for his horrible mistake.
The crash was worse then both parties thought, probably due to shock.
Bob’s youngest, had flown from the impact and hit the front window.
The child was in critical condition.
Once the ambulance came to  check everyone over, Joe who had left the scene to call his lawyer, hadn’t even checked with the victims in the other car and was oblivious to the damages that ensued.
The ambulance took the youngest child to the hospital immediately, along with Bob and his family.
The scene was cleaned up normally involving, police, witnesses and ambulances.
During the time that Bob and his family was being driven to the hospital, Joe came back to assess his car that he was worried about.
It had more damage on the front then he expected, he was definitely going to counter sue for the damages done to his BMW.
Witnesses that were around answering questions from the police met Joe and were flattered by his charm.
He told police in an apologetic manor, he was simply trying to merge onto the highway, when this car in front of him slammed on their breaks.
He admitted it was his fault and was completely distracted due to the recent news that his mother was quite ill.
Joe’s mother was not ill at all, Joe used this excuse to gain sympathy from others and fed off of their reactions. It cushioned his need for always being the victim.
Witnesses were empathetic towards this well dressed man whom was admitting his carelessness, I mean the poor guy’s mother was “severely ill” after all.
Joe was good at making people feel special about themselves and was able to blend into various social settings no matter anyone’s personality type.
Joe pointed out a Canucks sticker on the police officer’s window and started discussing hockey with the officer.
The police let his guard down and completely fell into this calculated superficial distraction
Police were understanding and were relieved to be dealing with such an “honest” and well mannered man.
One of the witnesses the police was questioning asked about the man, Bob, in the car that was hit.
The witness also fell for Joe’s con’s by being flattered when he pointed out that she appeared to be in very good shape for being a mom.
The witness happened to be in the same fast food place as Bob and had witnessed his outburst.
The witness depicted Bob’s character to the police solely based on her brief encounter with Bob at the fast food place and unknowingly mixed in with her new and only impression of Joe.
Right there the police had a one and only impression of Bob  based on that tiny piece of knowledge the witness shared.
Either subconsciously or consciously, the police formed an opinion on Bob.
As time went on, Joe heard back from his lawyer.

To Joe’s utter shock, one of the children in the back of the vehicle was thrown by the impact and hit the front windshield.

This child fortunately did not die, however the child unfortunately suffered multiple bruises, a broken bone and trauma.
Joe was in absolute denial.
He had already preconceived when the two vehicles had collided that he would escape the consequences like he always did.
So the news his lawyer shared with him made absolutely no difference to him, in fact he was able to use the information for ammunition.
“That bum should have had his child’s seat belt on tighter” he said to his lawyer. “I want compensation for the damages on MY vehicle”.
The lawyer replied, “The seat belt was on, it appears it had broken on impact”.
Between the lawyer and Joe, they were able to conjure up a defense using some of the witnesses on scene.
The witness that watched Bob lose his temper at the fast food place, was able to depict that Bob may in fact be a careless father.
Joe’s lawyer made a defense around the premise that Bob clearly had anger issues, was a careless father and the seat belt probably was damaged prior to the crash.
The perception of this story, by now, most who read this will be focused, or even agreeing how both unreliable and careless of a father Bob is.
Joe is well mannered, meant no harm and can’t possibly be blamed for the excessive damage done to Bob’s child.
The reality of this situation is that Joe hit Bob’s car.
The impact of Joe hitting Bob’s car is that a child, Bob’s child, suffered immense trauma and physical damage, the child could have died.
Irregardless of what people’s opinions and perceptions are of Bob, he did not create this accident, Joe did.
Joe caused Bob’s child to  be injured.
Bob had fastened the child’s seat belt prior to the accident.
Everyone’s focus was on Joe, his vehicle, his mother’s recent illness and so forth.
No one was focused on Bob, his family or his child.
Should this situation go to trial, Bob could not only have his reputation defiled, but he could possibly face charges for child neglect.
When the reality is, the seat belt broke, from Joe’s carelessness.
All Joe is focused on is HIM, HE is the victim and the actual victim’s, Bob and his child, are forgotten.Perception is extremely different then reality.
Joe chose to perceive himself as the victim out of selfish ambition.
Perhaps whatever issues he constantly is suppressing is what caused him to channel his anger in the misfortune of others at their expense, not his.
It’s possible Joe wanted to escape consequence, because it’s a method of survival he is so accustomed to, that he knows no other way to survive.
Lastly, people, like the witnesses, tend to be easily deceived and go based off of little, to no information.
The dangers with relying on one’s perception versus facing actual reality, is that the actual victim, the child in this case is completely forgotten about.
Bob on top of all the things hes going through, has now the fear of his reputation being ruined, added financial stress and assisting his child with all the trauma that goes hand in hand with this situation.
It’s probable that should that loud mouth witness, have seen Bob when he took his wife out for their anniversary, took his children on a camping trip or gave money to a local charity, that the opinion of the witness and others would be altered.
However the witness and everyone else chose to see things how they wanted and formed a judgement.
It’s almost certain that if that loud mouthed witness had seen Joe earlier that week drink himself into oblivion and drove despite being intoxicated, had they seen Joe gamble away his money, cheat on his taxes and saw the affair he was having, it’s certain the witness and others would have had made a judgement towards Joe.
The dangers of assuming someone’s character based on short encounters, one time sightings or even years of distorted knowledge is this:

If that loud mouth witness spread the gossip throughout the town, poor Bob would have been deemed as a neglectful father.
The child wouldn’t have the sympathy they deserved, rather neglect.
Had Joe actually taken this situation to trial, he would have escaped the consequences he deserved.
He would yet again fail to take responsibility and ownership for his actions.
He would have become the victim, stealing all necessary assistance to a family who are the actual victims, for his own selfish gain.I’m sure many, by now, anyone would shake their heads, take their focus off Joe and start wondering what will happen to Bob as well as the child.
The sad thing is, earlier on in the story, most people will be concerned about poor Joe’s well being, completely forgetting about Bob and his family being taken to the hospital.
We all desire justice to be served.

We demand the rapist, child molester, murderer, racist, animal abuser, adulterer and thief’s to get what they deserve.
Yet as much as we desire justice to be served, we are so quick to form our own conclusions on little knowledge by allowing innocent people get served what they don’t deserve.
If something isn’t black or white, clearly bad or clearly good, we leave it to ourselves to decide what is and what isn’t, when we really don’t have those rights.
We need to cautiously be aware of the actual dictionary definitions and we must NOT confuse these two terms, ever.
Perception: A way of regarding, understanding, or interpreting something; a mental impression
Reality: The world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of themFor the witness in us, it’s so important to separate speculation from fact and absolutely pertinent to separate perception from reality.
For the Joe in us, it’s absolutely vital to take complete responsibility and to stop using perception as an excuse and face actual reality.
Last but certainly not least, for the Bob and/or his child in us, remember to not allow people’s perception’s to define fact, but always stay in reality, which is truth.

Please follow and like me: