Striking back in relationships, (no not physically obviously)

[grahamg]

Move on, as the old saying goes "You win some you learn some."
The best revenge is to grow and survive, lose the toxicity, not the lesson.

As we seem to have moved on to swapping quotes on this thread somewhat, here is what the great rugby union commentator, the late Bill McLaren had to say when told to move on over the death of his daughter at an early age, (he said he'd never accept it or move on):

"Just before the start of the 2002 Wales v Scotland match in Cardiff, the stadium announcer asked people to stand and acknowledge Bill McLaren's great contribution to the sport. The whole ground rose, leaving McLaren choking back the tears. Then came a voice in his ear: 'Cue, Bill...'

Coping with his emotions on that day was obviously not straightforward, even for a commentator of Bill McLaren's experience, used to being caught up in some of the most dramatic moments rugby has ever seen. But Bill also talks frankly about the greatest tragedy of his life: the death of his younger daughter from cancer at 46, the three years of agony and the trauma of her final day. Bill wanted to stay at her bedside but she insisted he go and carry out a commentating duty in Edinburgh on the Saturday afternoon. He did so, rushed back to the hospital, but she had died that afternoon while he was on air.

McLaren, himself, had almost died of TB in his youth and he tells of the days and nights when he hid under the sheets in bed at the Scottish hospital where he was kept for 19 months, 'crying myself to sleep each night as they took away my friends who had died that day. I was certain I would be next'."

 

[Knight]

I don't think this was about winning. I view it more as reading what another poster writes about & questioning parts of the content. In one of my posts I made it clear I was curious. That was met with "none of your business" & what can only be described as suspicion by the thread OP that I had dark thoughts about what may have caused the situation as it unfolded.

I didn't!

 

[grahamg]

I don't think this was about winning. I view it more as reading what another poster writes about & questioning parts of the content. In one of my posts I made it clear I was curious. That was met with "none of your business" & what can only be described as suspicion by the thread OP that I had dark thoughts about what may have caused the situation as it unfolded.
I didn't!

"We'll move on from that aspect of our discussion maybe", (or we can do if you like ?)?

 

[grahamg]

Madman
By Kahlil Gibran
You ask me how I became a madman. It happened thus:
One day, long before many gods were born, I woke from a deep sleep and found all my masks were stolen,—the seven masks I have fashioned and worn in seven lives,—I ran maskless through the crowded streets shouting, “Thieves, thieves, the cursed thieves.”
Men and women laughed at me and some ran to their houses in fear of me.
And when I reached the market place, a youth standing on a house-top cried, “He is a madman.” I looked up to behold him; the sun kissed my own naked face for the first time. For the first time the sun kissed my own naked face and my soul was inflamed with love for the sun, and I wanted my masks no more. And as if in a trance I cried, “Blessed, blessed are the thieves who stole my masks.”
Thus I became a madman.
And I have found both freedom and safety in my madness; the freedom of loneliness and the safety from being understood, for those who understand us enslave something in us.

It doesn't quite scan so well as the last one in my humble opinion, and as to the contents, mmmm...., not sure, nor care!, ("has it made the best seller list yet"?)

 

[Knight]

"We'll move on from that aspect of our discussion maybe", (or we can do if you like ?)?

Moving on is best.

 

[grahamg]

Moving on is best.

Though according to Bill McLaren there were instances in his great and full life, when he refused all those who urged him to move on the satisfaction of agreeing with them, (on a matter very dear to his heart), but so far as the trivia we're discussing "you've got a deal"!

 

[grahamg]

Because I breathed

Because I breathed you can breathe,
Because I walked you can walk too,
Because I spoke, you too can speak,
Because I saw with my eyes you can see,

Because I felt you can feel as well,
Because I hurt you can feel pain,
Because I made mistakes you too can make them,
Because I may have done some good so can you,

Because I learnt you were taught,
Because I loved, and believed in love you are here,
Because I laughed you laughed too,
Because I cried, you too can cry,

Because I am misunderstood you misunderstand too,
Because I spoke the truth you can better understand truth and lies,
Because I would not be told what to say, you heard what I wanted to say,
Because I will not be told to move on, you may choose not to move on

Because I am unique, I am unique to you,
Because of all the above, I may even be the most unique to you,
Because I am not acknowledged, none of the above is changed,
Because I bequeath all this to you, I give more than genes alone,

Because I was given all this too, you may pass this on one day.

Brian K.G. Halli

 

[Dana]

It doesn't quite scan so well as the last one in my humble opinion, and as to the contents, mmmm...., not sure, nor care!, ("has it made the best seller list yet"?)

Not only has he made the "best seller list" but he is one of the most respected poets in the US, England andthe rest of the world. He died in 1931.
You may gain a lot from reading his works.

 

[grahamg]

Not only has he made the "best seller list" but he is one of the most respected poets in the US, England andthe rest of the world. He died in 1931.
You may gain a lot from reading his works.

"Excuse my ignorance", (now what's your,.....!).

 

[Dana]

Defeat by Kahlil Gibran

Defeat, my Defeat, my solitude and my aloofness;

You are dearer to me than a thousand triumphs,

And sweeter to my heart than all world-glory.


Defeat, my Defeat, my self-knowledge and my defiance,

Through you I know that I am yet young and swift of foot

And not to be trapped by withering laurels.

And in you I have found aloneness

And the joy of being shunned and scorned.


Defeat, my Defeat, my shining sword and shield,

In your eyes I have read

That to be enthroned is to be enslaved,

And to be understood is to be leveled down,

And to be grasped is but to reach one's fullness

And like a ripe fruit to fall and be consumed.


Defeat, my Defeat, my bold companion,

You shall hear my songs and my cries and my silences,

And none but you shall speak to me of the beating of wings,

And urging of seas,

And of mountains that burn in the night,

And you alone shall climb my steep and rocky soul.


Defeat, my Defeat, my deathless courage,

You and I shall laugh together with the storm,

And together we shall dig graves for all that die in us,

And we shall stand in the sun with a will,

And we shall be dangerous.

 

[grahamg]

Defeat by Kahlil Gibran

Defeat, my Defeat, my solitude and my aloofness;
You are dearer to me than a thousand triumphs,
And sweeter to my heart than all world-glory.
Defeat, my Defeat, my self-knowledge and my defiance,
Through you I know that I am yet young and swift of foot
And not to be trapped by withering laurels.
And in you I have found aloneness
And the joy of being shunned and scorned.
Defeat, my Defeat, my shining sword and shield,
In your eyes I have read
That to be enthroned is to be enslaved,
And to be understood is to be leveled down,
And to be grasped is but to reach one's fullness
And like a ripe fruit to fall and be consumed.
Defeat, my Defeat, my bold companion,
You shall hear my songs and my cries and my silences,
And none but you shall speak to me of the beating of wings,
And urging of seas,
And of mountains that burn in the night,
And you alone shall climb my steep and rocky soul.
Defeat, my Defeat, my deathless courage,
You and I shall laugh together with the storm,
And together we shall dig graves for all that die in us,
And we shall stand in the sun with a will,
And we shall be dangerous.

Anymore, (having nothing to do with the thread topic), what about one of your own?

 

[Dana]

Because I breathed

Because I breathed you can breathe,
Because I walked you can walk too,
Because I spoke, you too can speak,
Because I saw with my eyes you can see,

Because I felt you can feel as well,
Because I hurt you can feel pain,
Because I made mistakes you too can make them,
Because I may have done some good so can you,

Because I learnt you were taught,
Because I loved, and believed in love you are here,
Because I laughed you laughed too,
Because I cried, you too can cry,

Because I am misunderstood you misunderstand too,
Because I spoke the truth you can better understand truth and lies,
Because I would not be told what to say, you heard what I wanted to say,
Because I will not be told to move on, you may choose not to move on

Because I am unique, I am unique to you,
Because of all the above, I may even be the most unique to you,
Because I am not acknowledged, none of the above is changed,
Because I bequeath all this to you, I give more than genes alone,

Because I was given all this too, you may pass this on one day.

Brian K.G. Halli

Oh...I thought you had changed the topic when you posted this!!
.

 

[AnnieA]

...

Your "bloodhound" tendencies, (as I'm fairly sure they are), a strong desire you seem to wish to foster and develop, to promote the idea I'm responsible for any breakdown in my interpersonal relationships...

In defense of @Knight's observations. I think you're more responsible than you're owning up to. You've told us before in other threads that you had contact with her when your parent(s) were still alive, but now you obviously don't. Even posted a pic of you, your father, your daughter and her first child. You've also told us that your ex BIL was afraid he would get in trouble for telling you when your daughter's second child was born. Those facts point to issues far deeper and more recent than custody rulings when she was a child.

 

[grahamg]

In defense of @Knight's observations. I think you're more responsible than you're owning up to. You've told us before in other threads that you had contact with her when your parent(s) were still alive, but now you obviously don't. Even posted a pic of you, your father, your daughter and her first child. You've also told us that your ex BIL was afraid he would get in trouble for telling you when your daughter's second child was born. Those facts point to issues far deeper and more recent than custody rulings when she was a child.

Dear me, "no I'm sorry you're wrong, barking up the wrong tree and so on"!
Aged twenty one my daughter told both my parents the reason why she'd shunned me for ten years, and it had nothing whatever to do with anything I'd done, and since then the circumstances or reasons for her declining contact have not changed.
However, I'm glad you remember earlier posts threads and arguments, and this one has run into the sand pretty much as they did. I should not be so surprised that a majority here are wedded to "the best interests of the child paramount legal principle", as experts examining this same phenomenon have stated it has an almost mystical hold over the public in western countries.

 

[AnnieA]

Aged twenty one my daughter told both my parents the reason why she'd shunned me for ten years, and it had nothing whatever to do with anything I'd done, and since then the circumstances or reasons for her declining contact have not changed.

You can't heal what you refuse to own. No well-adjusted adult (which you've stated numerous times that your daughter is) shuns another adult...especially a parent...for no fault on the 'shunee's' part. Interpersonal conflict takes two.

I should not be so surprised that a majority here are wedded to "the best interests of the child paramount legal principle", as experts examining this same phenomenon have stated it has an almost mystical hold over the public in western countries.

My brother has had full custody of his daughter for almost a year due to "the best interests of the child." She left her mom's (traditional arrangement of Friday after school to Monday morning, 50/50 holidays and summer break), had a friend drive her to my brother's house and told my brother he could take her back to her mom's but she would just leave again. The court appointed an ad litem attorney for my niece and also ordered counseling sessions for my niece, brother, and the mom. Following the meetings with the ad litem and the counselor and the parents' attorneys, the court awarded my brother full custody. My niece has the option to visit her mother when she chooses and it's not been much. She'll go over for family events for a few hours but that's so far been all she's wanted to do.

The courts often try very hard to determine and act for the best interests of the child.

 

[grahamg]

You can't heal what you refuse to own. No well-adjusted adult (which you've stated numerous times that your daughter is) shuns another adult...especially a parent...for no fault on the 'shunee's' part. Interpersonal conflict takes two.
Grahamg wrote: We disagree, I have met many who have done exactly that, but if your knowledge of life/human nature, trumps my first hand experience, then there is no room left for arguing is there!!!!!

My brother has had full custody of his daughter for almost a year due to "the best interests of the child." She left her mom's (traditional arrangement of Friday after school to Monday morning, 50/50 holidays and summer break), had a friend drive her to my brother's house and told my brother he could take her back to her mom's but she would just leave again. The court appointed an ad litem attorney for my niece and also ordered counseling sessions for my niece, brother, and the mom. Following the meetings with the ad litem and the counselor, the court awarded my brother full custody. My niece has the option to visit her mother when she chooses and it's not been much. She'll go over for family events for a few hours but that's so far been all she's wanted to do.

So, yes, the courts often try very hard to determine and act in the best interests of the child.

Well done to your brother, but for you and he to be right, Matt O'Connor and all his F4J members have to be wrong, and not only that but the late Sir Geoffrey How's, (the late Lord Howe), told Dame Vera Baird for Tony Blair's government twenty years ago that "the best interests of the child paramount legal principle wasn't working!

 

[AnnieA]

Well done to your brother, but for you and he to be right, Matt O'Connor and all his F4J members have to be wrong, and not only that but the late Sir Geoffrey How's, (the late Lord Howe), told Dame Vera Baird for Tony Blair's government twenty years ago that "the best interests of the child paramount legal principle wasn't working!

It's what happened. No 'expert' debate involved.

Grahamg wrote: We disagree, I have met many who have done exactly that, but if your knowledge of life/human nature, trumps my first hand experience, then there is no room left for arguing is there!!!!!

Well-adjusted people (and you've touted your daughter as exactly that time after time after time) don't sever contact with another person without a good reason for doing so based, in part, by the behavior of the shunned person. If it feels like 'arguing', it may be stepping on your toes or you may just like to argue. Regardless, I'm not surprised by your answer. Knew when I posted it that the chances of getting through to you were pretty much slim to none given your repeated defensive responses to people, but thought I'd give it one last try.

If it makes you feel better to fantasize about paying your daughter back by shunning her should she ever try to reconcile, go for it.

 

[grahamg]

It's what happened. No 'expert' debate involved.

Grahamg wrote:
There is you know, (or even if don't know!).

Well-adjusted people (and you've touted your daughter as exactly that time after time after time) don't sever contact with another person without a good reason for doing so based, in part, by the behavior of the shunned person. If it feels like 'arguing', it may be stepping on your toes or you may just like to argue. Regardless, I'm not surprised by your answer. Knew when I posted it that the chances of getting through to you were pretty much slim to none given your repeated defensive responses to people, but thought I'd give it one last try.

If it makes you feel better to fantasize about paying your daughter back by shunning her should she ever try to reconcile, go for it.

Yes they do, and thanks for the profuse advice, that I'm never going to take, and don't believe in at all, "you're part of the problem not the solution in my view", (but I'm content with that, and knew when starting the thread to expect this treatment).

 

[grahamg]

View attachment 163402
I like this one grahamg.
Sometimes this is the only way. I don't see it as striking back, more of putting oneself first, maybe for the first time.
Whatever you decide to do will be the right thing for you. No one else can really understand your particular situation no matter how much they might imagine they do. Whatever you decide to do I hope it works for you - mate.

And I agree with you that fathers often get a bad deal in family law situations, as do paternal grandparents. In the case of grandparents, I heard it explained in these terms by one of those talk-back radio lawyers here ... Children have the right to know their grandparents, the grandparents don't necessarily have the right to know their grandchildren.

We seem to have lost you from the fray, (wise move!), but thank you again for your comments, (makes a change!)

 

[grahamg]

Quote:
"It may be argued that the paramountcy principle casts such an individualistic and ‘bossy’ image of the child as to suppose that nothing matters except that child’s best interests. First, the paramountcy principle (if not its interpretation) is unduly narrowly individualistic and fails to reconcile the rights of children and those of parents. Those who argue for children’s liberation tend to construe human rights protection as a zero-sum game in which children’s gains are adults’ losses,....."

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...uction-of-the-best-interests-of-the-child.pdf

Here is an explanation why those in charge wish to use the best interests of the child paramount principle to curtail parental rights, (there being no statuary parental rights in the UK):

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmjust/518/51807.htm

"Stephen Cobb, of the Family Law Bar Association, said it was difficult to see how the paramountcy principle could be bettered or enhanced by the addition of a presumption of contact, (with the parents)."

"If we introduce a presumption, we would then have to incorporate a range of situations in which one would say that the presumption wouldn't apply,...."

 

[Knight]

Quote:
"It may be argued that the paramountcy principle casts such an individualistic and ‘bossy’ image of the child as to suppose that nothing matters except that child’s best interests. First, the paramountcy principle (if not its interpretation) is unduly narrowly individualistic and fails to reconcile the rights of children and those of parents. Those who argue for children’s liberation tend to construe human rights protection as a zero-sum game in which children’s gains are adults’ losses,....."

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Admark-Moyo-2/publication/317450437_Reconceptualising_the_'paramountcy_principle'_Beyond_the_individualistic_construction_of_the_best_interests_of_the_child/links/5d0ced1092851cf4403ebc4b/Reconceptualising-the-paramountcy-principle-Beyond-the-individualistic-construction-of-the-best-interests-of-the-child.pdf

Here is an explanation why those in charge wish to use the best interests of the child paramount principle to curtail parental rights, (there being no statuary parental rights in the UK):

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmjust/518/51807.htm

"Stephen Cobb, of the Family Law Bar Association, said it was difficult to see how the paramountcy principle could be bettered or enhanced by the addition of a presumption of contact, (with the parents)."

"If we introduce a presumption, we would then have to incorporate a range of situations in which one would say that the presumption wouldn't apply,...."

Are you planning of having sex & expecting a child to be born from that? Or fostering a minor child that may cause you problems that you would need the legal system to adjudicate some problem?

 

[grahamg]

Are you planning of having sex & expecting a child to be born from that? Or fostering a minor child that may cause you problems that you would need the legal system to adjudicate some problem?

Nope!

 

[Knight]

Nope!

Great! Wouldn't want you to post about additional problems that have no explanation.

 

[grahamg]

Great! Wouldn't want you to post about additional problems that have no explanation.

Yes, great, I agree with you, (what else could I do?).
Now back to a discussion about those decent dads/parents getting a raw deal, (if you believe such a situation exists?).

 

[grahamg]

View attachment 162625
Love cannot be forced no matter how deserving of it you are.

I've just gone back to look at one or two posts arising immediately after the OP, and this one, plus at least one other, deserve more responses I believe than they received first time around.

"Love cannot be forced" you say,...., well yes, something to agree upon there, and importantly, (if agreed generally), it goes some way towards defining what love might be, or what we mean when we use the word "love"(?).

Its been said that "love" means simply to be "happy with someone", and nothing more, (I think I'm right in saying that, though I'm not sure I agree with the definition?), and moving on to the second half of the sentence above, it is suggested "no matter how deserving of it (/love) you are", this makes no difference as to whether someone does or does not love you, or at least doesn't guarantee they will.

Thus the worst parent might be loved by their child, and the best patent not loved or hated even, (that's the logic of the statement above isn't it?).

I believe so far as my own parents are concerned, that I did not understand the extent to which they loved me until after they had died, hence probably did not treat them as fairly, or lovingly as I should have done, (not that I'd have ever shunned either of them under any circumstances though!).