Venting I have no sympathy for people who deliberately get themselves into trouble and expect a bailout.

[TAW122]

There is a common theme in society and it likes to preach that we should be sympathetic and pity the people who find themselves in bad situations. At face value, yes that is true and I agree with that, especially for people who are in situations outside of their control or have no say in. However, there is a caveat that I'd like to explore a bit and that is when people deliberately get themselves into a bind, or into trouble, and then society or peers expect me to 'feel sorry', 'pity', or even expect me to lend a hand. To that, I take offense because first off, it would their fault for deliberately getting themselves into such a situation, yet expecting me to feel sorry and "help" them out of the mess they themselves created. It's not simply about being a 'good' person (good and bad are subjective) nor entitlement, but about being expected to feel sorry and pressured into bailing them out for something they did.

Here are a few RL examples that come to mind:

Back when I played an online game several years ago, I had a friend who played an online game with me, and while I knew more about the game than he did, I was more of the cautious and careful player, not taking unnecessary risks, using common sense, and more. I told him not to go to dangerous spot where if he died (in game) he would lose his items and gear. He understood, but still against the better of his judgment, went on ahead and then suffered consequences. He ended up dying and losing his items. A few days later, he begged me to replace his items and what not. I told him no because I told him the risks and even advised him not to needlessly do it, yet he did anyways and suffered consequences as a result of that. He shouldn't be entitled to get me to 'bail him out' for his bad decision plus the fact that I had my own items and goals and that would just impede my progress or goals for myself. (Imagine if everytime someone had to bail someone out all the time, said person would have nothing left to bail anyone out!)

Another example (not me but someone else on the Internet) is when someone deliberately handicaps him/herself in a particular activity and when he/she loses or fails to achieve whatever goal he/she had in mind and yet expects others to pity him/her, I simply cannot and will not. This is because he/she deliberately made the decision to make life more difficult and as a result suffered consequences, but wants me to feel bad for that person let alone 'bail' said person out, I don't think so. I know I'm speaking more generically here, but the point is still the same: I should not be expected to feel sorry let alone 'help' someone who deliberately finds him/herself in a bad situation. Mind you, if it is someone who was unfortunate and ended up in a situation outside of his/her control, then yes, I would certainly have sympathy and empathy for him/her, may even help that person out if I am capable of doing so.

I might get some flak and backlash for this, but this is how I feel towards society in general and for the people who intentionally make their situation more difficult than it should be yet expect me to show sympathy or pity towards their plight, or worse, to bail them out. This is not only a simple matter of "nobody is entitled to anything", but a bit more of "they lose the right to complain when they themselves deliberately make their situation worse, or make their lives harder than it should be" (well they "can" complain, but their complaint would hold less credit, weight, than someone who is legitimately trapped or find themselves in a bind/quandary through no fault of their own.).

I don't know if I'm the only one who feels this way, but do others share similar sentiments as well?

 

[Birdie]

Self-sabotage.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I have compassion and empathy for making bad decisions. I've made plenty.

No one is entitled to a bailout, but if others have excess to give that does not diminish their resources for themselves, then it can do a lot for someone to help them out of their mess. But if they have a pattern of fucking up, not heeding external or internal reason, and relying on others to bail them out, then it does not truly serve them to bail them out. It's also not wise of them to ask for a bailout from the same person who advised against the unwise action, because they already gave from the resource of their knowledge and wisdom. The one who fucked up is making the other person responsible for thinking for them and then owning the responsibility for not thinking.

If someone causes problems for themselves but never has any, while everyone else has problems as a result -- that is, overinvesting their own practical and/or internal resources in that person's problems -- then that person needs some problems. It's no one else's responsibility to clean up their messy yard, then everyone else's yards end up looking like shit while theirs is great, and they've put no effort into it. Let them have a shitty yard, and clean it up themselves and do their own maintenance if they don't like its condition. Compassion for them is okay, it's not easy cleaning up and maintaining a yard. Some folks can't handle the discomfort of seeing someone else's yard in shitty condition, and take resources from where they rightfully belong to clean it up and keep it clean; that's co-dependence. Dumping problems into someone else's yard is a lack of self-ownership and responsibility, and can sometimes even be abusive.

 

[TheQ22]

Lend me a £50K - I've made some bad decisions and I need a bail out.

 

[GrumpyFrog]

The concept of circumstances being out of ones control vs. being a consequence of ones actions is tricky. There are some clear cut situations that obviously go either one way or the other, but most of real life situations are debatable when it comes to determining the extent of personal responsibility, so I don't think I would be able to apply this philosophy.

I guess I am a more of "no one is entitled to anything" person. I believe that helping others and being compassionate is great, but it's a choice, not an obligation. As long as you haven't caused trouble for other people with your actions directly, you aren't obligated to help them out of that trouble, or even to provide a justification as to why you wouldn't.

I think my capability for sympathy and compassion is sadly currently completely burned out, I am unable to express genuine sympathy. This is a consequence of people repeatedly taking advantage of my compassion to a different extent, varying from minor to seriously messed up and traumatic situations. I can offer someone advice, look for solutions for their problem, maybe offer some practical help when possible, but I am unable to extend emotional support, I just don't "have it in me" anymore.

 

[Stick]

I get how you feel. I don't think you should be expected to bail someone out like that, because it's not your responsibility.
Personally, though, I'm able to sympathize with people who do things like that. Sometimes I find myself feeling desperate for help from other people, and honestly I can understand how that desperation might turn into self-sabotage in other people. I have a lot of compassion for those people because I can relate to their motivations.
Still, they shouldn't expect you to fix it for them.

 

[TAW122]

Bumping this topic as I had an thought recently. Before I go on, here is a mini-disclaimer:

Note: People are welcome to do what they wish to do (within legal boundaries of course), including being illogical, irrational, or even making adverse decisions for themselves, it's free will after all. I am not telling people they can't do xyz or what not, but also, they must be willing to accept the consequences of their actions.

With that said, here is the additional thought and this applies to pro-choicers as well (again not railing against any specific individual but speaking in more or less general terms). For example, consdier two pro-choicers, 'A' and 'B', respectively. Both of them decided to exercise their choice in self determination on whether to CTB or live, though one of them, 'A' decides to restrict oneself and make things more different for themselves rather than utilizing whatever they can to be free. However, pro-choicer 'B' decides to do whatever it takes (within legal bounds of course) even if it is underhanded or not, just to get a leg up and/or not be at a serious disadvantage. Say both of them end up failing to fulfill their objective, which is self-deliverance.

'A' severely limited and handicapped him/herself such that he/she is not only at a serious disadvantage in his/her predicament, but made his/her circumstances more complicated and difficult than necessary (e.g. continuing to play honorably despite his/her opposition playing dirty and gaining an upper hand/unfair advantage over 'A'). As a result, A failed. In such a scenario, I would have little to no sympathy (no offence) for 'A' because he/she deliberately made his/her situation more difficult than he/she could and didn't try to put his/her best effort against the pro-lifers assuming he/she had the capability to do so.

On the other hand, 'B' even though at a disadvantage, decided to fight fire with fire (legally) and does his/her best, yet still falls short of his/her goals. He/she utilized the same tactics against his/her opposition and even put his/her best efforts forward, thus would be very respectable in my opinion. I would have sympathy for 'B' because he/she actually did his/her best and despite his/her efforts falling short, it shows that said person is able to do well and has done his/her best versus someone who doesn't try.

Ultimately, as I've stated before in the disclaimer and I will state it again. People are welcome to do what they want to do as a result of free will, but of course, that doesn't mean that they are free from consequences of their actions or from criticism of their actions (free speech). In other words, they are free to do whatever they choose (even if it is not to their best interest), however, don't expect that I would have sympathy for their own deliberate choices should they end up worse off as a result of it.

 

[Xocoyotziin]

My argument against this would be that the person who puts themselves in such a situation doesn't truly understand the consequences, because if they did, they would not have. Mere words from an authority are not enough to convey the reality of any given situation to anyone. So, personally, I do have sympathy for such people, and if I had the resources, past those needed to assure my own contentment, I would bail them out as long as they realized how deep the shit they might have gotten themselves in could've been.

Fuck all the other virtues. Forgiveness triumphs over everything, and the world would be a better place if it were more regularly practiced. There's already too much fucking suffering. Suffering caused accidentally by miscommunication is enough, intentional suffering is intolerable. And I don't think it promotes growth either.

 

[Wayfaerer]

People like that really tick me off. It's just like when people major in an obviously worthless degree and then they expect the government (taxpayer) to come to the rescue and pick up the tab. They have the audacity to wonder why they can't find a good job with a bachelor of arts in Siamese Basket Weaving. This is also one of the ways in which I experience schadenfreude.

 

[TAW122]

My argument against this would be that the person who puts themselves in such a situation doesn't truly understand the consequences, because if they did, they would not have. Mere words from an authority are not enough to convey the reality of any given situation to anyone. So, personally, I do have sympathy for such people, and if I had the resources, past those needed to assure my own contentment, I would bail them out as long as they realized how deep the shit they might have gotten themselves in could've been.

Fuck all the other virtues. Forgiveness triumphs over everything, and the world would be a better place if it were more regularly practiced. There's already too much fucking suffering. Suffering caused accidentally by miscommunication is enough, intentional suffering is intolerable. And I don't think it promotes growth either.

Sure, I mean if it's like someone who chose a bad major in university or college and ends up worse due to not being aware of everything surrounding the major choice (job market, job security, salary, etc.) then yes, in such a circumstance, I could see having some sympathy and I may have a little bit. However, on the flipside though, if said person knew that a major wasn't going to bring job security and then still pursued the major and ended up worse off, then it would be very unlikely for me to have sympathy (let alone to bail said person out) for the person because said person knew about the risks and consequences that followed it.

People like that really tick me off. It's just like when people major in an obviously worthless degree and then they expect the government (taxpayer) to come to the rescue and pick up the tab. They have the audacity to wonder why they can't find a good job with a bachelor of arts in Siamese Basket Weaving. This is also one of the ways in which I experience schadenfreude.

That's an interesting take on it. I won't lie, there are times where I do experience schadenfreude too, especially with the people who have wronged me IRL; there is a bit of relief seeing their actions catch up to them (yes I know there will be people out there who not approve of my reasoning or attitude but that's fine).

 

[TooConscious]

The thing is you can't tell who's genuine in their story in this world because most people are so full of shit this world really is the bowels of the universe.
People genuinely in need through no/little fault of their own are usually so messed up with mental problems through trying to stay strong for too long people assume they're bad people yet the real bad people are coherent and mentally together enough to give a sob story that everyone believes because, did I mention the human race is a pile of shit.

 

[TAW122]

The thing is you can't tell who's genuine in their story in this world because most people are so full of shit this world really is the bowels of the universe.
People genuinely in need through no/little fault of their own are usually so messed up with mental problems through trying to stay strong for too long people assume they're bad people yet the real bad people are coherent and mentally together enough to give a sob story that everyone believes because, did I mention the human race is a pile of shit.

This is indeed very true and sadly, the "real" bad people who are coherent abuse genuine empathy while leaving the actual, genuine people who need the empathy from others. I agree with your last sentence as well too, the human race itself is a pile of shit, hence I'm a misanthrope.

 

[Deleted member 1465]

My nephew lost his license because he was over the limit for alcohol. It was the day after he'd been out drinking and he gunned the engine and kerbed it whilst leaving a car park. A prowl car was watching and they pulled him over and tested him. He was a teeny tiny bit over the limit still. The officer booked him and said he felt really bad about doing it.
The poor kid lost loads of work due to having no license and had to let his new car just sit outside and rot. When I think of the amount of times I've driven down the motorway after a skinful the previous evening and not even considered that I was technically over the limit because I felt utterly sober...