Its every man for himself in this world

[grahamg]

I do question my fathers views more as I get older

It's not easy to face, but there's also the possibility that your father wasn't the genius you seem to have believed. One of the things that happens when we grow up is that we allow ourselves these realizations. He may have been asking you to be less dependent on him so his life was easier. If that's what he expected or wanted, he should have remained childless.

I agree that I do feel people tend to reconsider whatever their parents told them as children more as they grow older, but so far as my dad remaining childless goes or that he should have done so, well that just wasn't a realistic prospect given his character (he even had an uncle who decided to leave his wife because she couldn't have children and had children with another woman subsequently, so important was it to him to have children). My mother wouldn't have married him either if she thought in any way he didn't want children, and they did successfully raise seven children, so no, that was never an option for them.

In any event I do think my father thought he was acting in his children's best interests by telling us: "Its every man for himself in this world", and I admit there was a contradiction in the way my father behaved which was that he spent his life helping and protecting his children.

What alternative piece of advice would you like fathers to impart to their children I wonder, given all the misgivings other forum members have expressed about thinking you can always rely on others to look after you, or generally trust folks to assist you in life?

 

[Smiling Jane]

What alternative piece of advice would you like fathers to impart to their children I wonder, given all the misgivings other forum members have expressed about thinking you can always rely on others to look after you, or generally trust folks to assist you in life?

I don't recall reading any responses that suggested you must always rely on others to look after you, but I have found if I reach out and ask for help, it's always there. I tried to push beyond some of my physical limitations a few days ago with unpleasant consequences, and my neighbor reminded me she is always willing to help; all I had to do was call.

I'm fairly sure, given the news that your relying only on himself father had a wife and a rather large passel of children, he didn't cook all of his own food, do all of his own shopping, clean his home by himself or always launder his own clothes and linens.

I think it's good to teach your children to function independently to the degree it makes sense, but his oversimplified stricture doesn't work all that well in real life. For example, one of my brothers was an artist who was never able to master technology. Things like car maintenance simply escaped him. He lived on his own in a major city for most of his adult life, working and functioning quite well as long as he wasn't required to venture very far outside his comfort zone. He had friends who were more than willing to fill in the blanks for him, and some of his best years were spent living communally in an environment where people helped each other, the antithesis of your father's "rule."

 

[Camper6]

I am female but I am also Australian. In general we do not subscribe to the dog eat dog view of society.

You never heard of dingo cannibalism?

 

[Warrigal]

No, dingos link paws around the campsite while singing Kum Bay Ya in four part harmony.

 

[grahamg]

Not a "rule", simply advice or a warning

I don't recall reading any responses that suggested you must always rely on others to look after you, but I have found if I reach out and ask for help, it's always there. I tried to push beyond some of my physical limitations a few days ago with unpleasant consequences, and my neighbor reminded me she is always willing to help; all I had to do was call.

I'm fairly sure, given the news that your relying only on himself father had a wife and a rather large passel of children, he didn't cook all of his own food, do all of his own shopping, clean his home by himself or always launder his own clothes and linens.

I think it's good to teach your children to function independently to the degree it makes sense, but his oversimplified stricture doesn't work all that well in real life. For example, one of my brothers was an artist who was never able to master technology. Things like car maintenance simply escaped him. He lived on his own in a major city for most of his adult life, working and functioning quite well as long as he wasn't required to venture very far outside his comfort zone. He had friends who were more than willing to fill in the blanks for him, and some of his best years were spent living communally in an environment where people helped each other, the antithesis of your father's "rule."

Here is the forum member I had in mind and quoted when he said the following (Camper6 wrote):

"No one is ever, ever, come to you and say "You are a nice guy". "Here's some money"."

I wouldn't feel to offended by my father, or what you might assume he was like, because his words to his children I started this thread with were not "rules" in any sense I can think of, merely his advice or a warning not to be "too soft", or be made a fool of in this life, and as I've said he didn't follow the "rule", if you wish to call it that, when it came to his own family anyway. He wanted to be there for his family when we needed him, and when my marriage broke down he told one of my brother-in-laws "he had something more to live for, by assisting his son when he knew I'd need his help".

 

[Camper6]

No, dingos link paws around the campsite while singing Kum Bay Ya in four part harmony.

While the show Dog eat Dog is playing on the television?

 

[Warrigal]

TV at the camp fire? Are you serious?

 

[Sunny]

I presume this also means "every women for herself in this world?"

What about the love and protection most mothers feel for their children, Grahamg? Does your father's philosophy mean that every mother would let her children starve while she snatches up the last morsel of food for herself?
(This applies to most fathers too, IMO.) Anyone who is lucky enough to love, or to have been loved, would disagree with that bitter, cynical statement.

 

[DaveA]

Obviously, from listening to some of the responses, I surely don't measure up to the standards put forth regarding self-reliance. More than once in my relatively long life, my wife and or kids have carried the load for me when I went through a tough patch and I've done the same for them. I've never felt bad for it, nor do I feel that I should.

INHO, a shared life is far happier than a solitary life where you care for no one and no one cares for (or about) you.

 

[CindyLouWho]

I "so" agree with your last statement, DaveA. In a perfect world, I too think "family" should be there for each other through thick and through thin. You are very fortunate, for sure!

 

[Camper6]

TV at the camp fire? Are you serious?

Und vy not? Ve have invented de portable t.v. Maybe not arrived in Australia yet. They usually are a few years behind the rest of us..

 

[Camper6]

Folks. Here's the way I see it. You have to get up there before you can help others. There's no shame in telling your kids they have to get up there and they are going to face competition on the way.

I remember writing a letter to my son early on in life and I stressed that the sooner he becomes independent the better off he will be.

A poor man has never given me a job. Unpopular rich guys have.

 

[grahamg]

Definitely, my father intended his words to be warning to both sons and daughters

I presume this also means "every women for herself in this world?"

What about the love and protection most mothers feel for their children, Grahamg? Does your father's philosophy mean that every mother would let her children starve while she snatches up the last morsel of food for herself?
(This applies to most fathers too, IMO.) Anyone who is lucky enough to love, or to have been loved, would disagree with that bitter, cynical statement.

No argument with you over the protection a mother provides for their children (or fathers as you say).

Perhaps I've mislead everyone into thinking his advice was meant to be applied to all situations.

Lets say his thinking was that in business it is necessary to be hard headed or you'll be taken advantage of by everyone, (something like that anyway, okay?), and see if that generates more agreement?

.

 

[Smiling Jane]

No argument with you over the protection a mother provides for their children (or fathers as you say).

Perhaps I've mislead everyone into thinking his advice was meant to be applied to all situations.

Lets say his thinking was that in business it is necessary to be hard headed or you'll be taken advantage of by everyone, (something like that anyway, okay?), and see if that generates more agreement?

.

Applied specifically to business situations, I could see some truth in his edict. Even so, I've seen some business mentoring situations where it would not have applied, where one person freely gave time to help another learn.

I guess if a person were in a no-rules highly competitive business environment, it might apply. Even then, it's not universally applicable.

 

[Camper6]

Business? Absolutely he worst. It's a big difference from the old days when employees were valued.

Now you are just a number.

Witness Sears. They are closing shop. The day to day employees are getting screwed big time.

The executives are cashing in big time.

What does it take to learn.?

 

[Warrigal]

I'm sorry but the phrase "every man for himself" in my mind is incomplete. My mind always completes the phrase that I have long known which is "everyman for himself and the Devil take the hindmost". It conjures up other slogans like the English one "I'm all right Jack, b*ugger you." To me is places self centredness at the heart of life and is not a philosophy that I would inculcate in the young.

Last Tuesday I was over at my daughter's house for dinner and afterwards my daughter, youngest grand daughter and I were talking. GD showed us some video of herself leading a group of quite disabled students playing music. It was chaos and bedlam in action but they were beginning to rehearse for an end of year concert.

GD is disappointed because she had applied to enter a masters degree course in music therapy and was not successful. We talked about the work she was doing with the children and I encouraged her to persevere because she has a gift and because it brings her much joy if not much money. She also earns money playing and singing in cafes but her bliss seems to be with the children. I observed that as a teacher, over the years that I worked with teens, I have touched the lives of many and her mother, a nurse, agreed and said that she had had a teacher who made a difference to her when she was ten and that as a nurse she too had made a difference. We urged her to go on and to try again to enter the masters degree course but above all, to do something in life that makes a difference to others because at the end of life it is not how much money we make or how many possessions we have that brings contentment.

Graham, I would replace your father's maxim with another - whatever you do in life, follow your bliss and be sure to make a difference to someone else.

 

[RadishRose]

[h=2]No Man is an Island[/h]
No man is an island, no man stands alone
Each man's joy is joy to me
Each man's grief is my own
We need one another, so I will defend
Each man as my brother
Each man as my friend

 

[Camper6]

I am noticing women have a different take on this than men.

 

[Knight]

In this world was included in the Op's opening post. In this world there are tribes that don't know the meaning of every man for himself. When tribes become like the rest of civilized society I don't think they are better off.

Depending on another without quid pro quo as a reason for helping strikes me a being more civilized.

 

[grahamg]

All's fair in love and war

I presume this also means "every women for herself in this world?"

Break

Anyone who is lucky enough to love, or to have been loved, would disagree with that bitter, cynical statement.

I came across someone repeating this comment earlier, and thought it might have some relevance to our discussions:

"All's fair in love and war"

Here is it's source:
http://classroom.synonym.com/origin-all-fair-love-war-9976.html

 

[JaniceM]

I came across someone repeating this comment earlier, and thought it might have some relevance to our discussions:

"All's fair in love and war"

Here is it's source:
http://classroom.synonym.com/origin-all-fair-love-war-9976.html

Sounds like a rather cold-blooded approach to life- especially if/when human beings get caught in the crossfire.

 

[Warrigal]

The origin:

The earliest known origin of the sentiment "all is fair in love in war" is found in poet John Lyly's novel "Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit," published in 1579. The novel recounts the romantic adventures of a wealthy and attractive young man, and includes the quote "the rules of fair play do not apply in love and war."

I prefer the Simpson's version "All's fair in oven war."

 

[grahamg]

Love outside our control

Warrigal wrote:
"The earliest known origin of the sentiment "all is fair in love in war" is found in poet John Lyly's novel "Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit," published in 1579. The novel recounts the romantic adventures of a wealthy and attractive young man, and includes the quote "the rules of fair play do not apply in love and war.""

JaniceM wrote:

"Sounds like a rather cold-blooded approach to life- especially if/when human beings get caught in the crossfire."

Here is an argument we might wish to consider, and that is the amount anyone of us is truly in control of who we might love, and as a consequence how responsible we might be should that love lead to some third party being hurt (the person breaking up someone's marriage for example, leaving the other partner bereft).

 

[Warrigal]

I'm not going to comment of the morality of someone knowingly breaking up a marriage.

 

[grahamg]

Unknowingly not so bad, but knowingly a no, no I assume

I'm not going to comment of the morality of someone knowingly breaking up a marriage.

Reading between the lines I'm assuming you're not that impressed with those who "knowingly" break up another's marriage, (or maybe not 100% happy with those who do so "unknowingly"?).

A lot of excuses are usually forthcoming though aren't there, maybe the most used being "They can't have been happy anyway or the affair it wouldn't have happened" .