3 ms·
> You know they'll help you even you got nothing to give and without expecting anything in return from them. I cannot decide if that is more abusive or more ro
by corty 5y ago
> You know they'll help you even you got nothing to give and without expecting anything in return from them.
I cannot decide if that is more abusive or more romanticized.
If you expect your friends to be there for you without you returning anything, you are abusing them. That isn't friendship, that is exploitation.
And if your friend is there for you even though you are incapable of returning anything, it is incredibly romantic. But also usually very limited, because that drain on your friend has consequences and needs to either be equalized by something (not you) or suck your friend dry until he himself is incapable. Which is a very un-romantic ending, because it leaves the world with 2 emotional cripples.
For me, friendship is also very much about knowing the limits of what i should make my friends suffer through.
- DyslexicAtheist 5y agolife is swings and roundabouts. having nothing to give in return isn't romantic - it's humbling. it's depressing and devastating the one who has no choice but to accept and I'd rather they get out of their dump than thinking about my expectations. it's more important that they're OK to me than if they give back (which I trust will anyway happen because "swings & roundabouts"). I understand most people are more calculating. My own family who would keep tabs of what they give and receive so to never feeling they're in somebody#s debt. I'm like that in business situations, and to those who I know would do it to me, but not to those who are close enough to consider friend. > for me, friendship is also very much about knowing the limits of what i should make my friends suffer through. yes, this very much!