There’s a peculiar cruelty in the well-meant, the kind that cloaks harm in sentiment and justifies injury with declarations of virtue.
We’re told to “look at their intentions,” as if what’s in someone’s heart should matter more than what they’ve actually done—whether it’s manipulation, constant criticism, control, or the slow erosion of your boundaries.
That’s an absurd suggestion. Judging morality by intent is like driving blindfolded and expecting applause for staying in the lane—until you hit someone.
Good intentions don’t excuse toxic behavior. Someone might believe they love you while slowly suffocating you with their version of care. They may raise their voice, make your choices, erode your autonomy—and still feel righteous. They might call it love. It’s not. It’s apathy in the language of affection. It’s control dressed as concern.
Intention doesn’t shield impact. Even harm dressed as love is still harm. The pain’s real. The effects last.
Intentions don’t bleed. Impact does. When someone says their harmful behavior should be excused by how they feel about you, they’re really saying this: that their story matters more than your experience. That they’d rather seem good than do good.
Idea for Impact: It’s painful to admit someone you love might be hurting you. But no matter how gilded the alibi, harm is harm. Don’t accept it just because it came in a velvet box.
Commit to doing something unfamiliar 
Recent news of Carnival Cruise Group’s decision to ban two “influencers” after a run of negative reviews has sparked a 
Cutting tennis balls in half might let you store more in a standard 3-ball tube, but the sacrifice is stark.
Fred Smith, who 
Fred Smith, the visionary founder of Federal Express (now FedEx,) 
The corporate world has developed a