SoulPancake / Conversations / When do you cross the line from compassionate to chump?

Jump into a Conversation about Life's' Big Questions

CultLeaderPancake

- 5 months ago

Feature
0
Like
Follow

When do you cross the line from compassionate to chump?

If we lived in a world where we never helped others and only helped ourselves, mankind would cease to exist since babies need everything and give nothing.

As we mature into adulthood, the idea is that we grow to become independent of our primary caretakers, but that doesn't mean we can't benefit from a little charity... whether it's free advice, a job offer, a hot meal, or some emergency cash to get out of a fix.

However, there are those who you can give everything you have and it still wouldn't be enough.

Clearly there is a lot of space in between the two extremes, so when it comes to charity, where is the line between savior and sucker?

source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25808862@N06/2544293819/

Recent Discussed Liked

First level responses second level responses

I have always said that I would give the shirt off of my back for anyone in true need. With that energy, sometimes we attract people that "use" that compassion and really suck you dry. I have learned recently that giving until you are worn out is not healthy. I have found that separating yourself or giving distance to the situation allows much more clarity. Sometimes we are the bridge that helps one being get to a better place in life but then we need to let go and let them take responsibility for their own path. Hanging on and "helping" them from one crisis to the other doesn't help anyone.

I would think each individual makes a judgment call on a case-by-case basis according to their intuition, knowledge, wisdom and promptings in this regard.

I think you cross the line when people take advantage of you and you don't put them in their place.

I have actually been thinkiking a lot about this lately because I am practicing compassionate meditation and where DO you draw the line? An answer that came to me recently that I haven't had time to completely ponder is "When the action no longer helps anyone". For exaple my MIL is an alcoholic. When she asks for $$ halfway throught the month from my partner we are not actually helping her OR ourselves by giving her the money so she can feed her habit. I have to give more complete thought to this to see if it might be the answer for me.

The feeling of giving to someone in true need is irreplaceable. I think people need to give with the notion that they aren't going to be compensated. If everyone gave without this vast self-righteousness that makes them believe we all deserve to be praised for showing basic human compassion to others then our society would be in a much more solid state.

---Clearly there is a lot of space in between the two extremes, so when it comes to charity, where is the line between savior and sucker?

I think that's a great question, I've been wondering about it for years and still haven't found an answer.

Although my actual "stance" (which might change tomorrow :p) is this :

_
It depends on why you are giving and what it costs you (amongst other things);

If you're hoping for anything in return, or for any kind of consequence from that gift that would give you any kind of right, including a right to "judge", that's not at all the same as a gift with no strings attached.

When I give some money to a beggar in the streets, that's not like the IMF giving money to Greece is it?

The IMF says "we lend you this money IF you do this, you do that, you report this, you change that" and so on.

When I give money to a beggar, there are no strings attached, he wants to use that cash to get drunk? Not my problem. Not only that, but I don't expect anything, not even recognition, not even thanks, nothing. That gift is "free of charge", and the objective is a simple one.

Which also means, if it's a woman with a baby she rents from mafia group in order to make people feel pity, f*ck it, not my problem. I don't work in the police. She's a woman, that's a baby, they are ragged, they are sitting in the street all day, who am I to judge?
____

On the other hand, I'm honestly not satisfied with this answer, it falls short...

Been weighing things out, trying to set things straight, but honestly? I really don't know.

Specially with regards to this : "However, there are those who you can give everything you have and it still wouldn't be enough."

Think it's a very tough question, don't think I can answer it properly, at least not now.

Though on the other hand, back track a bit, why does it matter? What is it that "we" are trying to achieve when replying to this question?

I'm not even sure about that...

Maybe one way to get round it is to give something else than money that's probably more precious, your time, your understanding, your experience, your compassion.

Cause if your giving that kind of "wealth", some of these actually enrich you the more you give them away and share them.

>If we lived in a world where we never helped others and only helped ourselves, mankind would cease to exist since babies need everything and give nothing.

I disagree. I believe a world where we never helped others could function perfectly fine. There are plenty of selfish incentives to have and care for a child. It used to be for the farm labor, now it can be something of an investment for your old age, to have someone to care for you. Not to mention all the satisfaction that one can derive from having a child. If you have a pet, you dont have it because you want to help it, you have it because you take pleasure from caring for it and interacting with it. A child is like a pet in this respect, although much more is invested, and much more is returned.

A world devoid of altruism would be a much more rational place, humans would thrive.

As far as the primary question goes, I think a good line to draw is at altruism. The moment your financial sacrifice leads to a decrease in your happiness that exceeds the happiness that you derive from giving. That is to say, you are a sucker when you no longer feel better about that other person having the money than yourself.

The line is where you draw it. Before getting involved, determine your own limits time-wise, financially, emotionally, etc.

I wonder if that line is drawn by the receiver and not the giver?

Charity is perhaps more a personal process deep inside you than any act of the hand or performance to be seen.
When the main motivation for giving is to get the warm feeling for yourself you are totally beholding to what the other person does with their side of that "transaction" once out of your hands. It is only if they use it to help themselves you become "saviour". If they use it to hurt themselves you become "enabler". And if they use it to hurt you, you become "chump".

The heart of charity is to give simply because you are able. You are in a place where a need is manifest, you have some ability to help (great or small, financial or otherwise doesn't matter). And perhaps you yourself have been the recipient of an unwarranted kindness from another and wish to pay this forward.
In this mindset you have completed the transaction in your own heart simply by reaching out to another. It certainly would be nice if they took full advantage of that leg up but if they don't you've still successfully completed an act of Human kindness and charity.

And that is something sacred.
If the recipient wants to take it, disrespect it, piss it up against the wall, even commit "sacrilege" with that sacred act . . . that is between them and powers higher than both. Your heart was to help, and theirs was to take advantage of someone who's heart was to help. That will only, can only, catch up with them in the worst possible time and way.

(That doesn't mean one still should not keep their head about them when seeking to help others. A meal or a supermarket gift card for example, is better than cash for a known alcoholic or addict. We can be wise in our charity but how it is taken is ultimately the responsibility and the charge, of the recipient.)

Hmm, all right, in my social work class last semester, we were given the assignment to do three nice things a day for humanity, whether it be for some person, the Earth, or whatever else. My professor made sure we knew the difference between going out of our way of doing something nice and doing something because we had to do it, that it was our responsibility anyway. It is your responsibility as a mother to feed, clothe, and educate your child. It isn't something you expect the child to return when you grow up, no matter if the child should do it anyway. It is your duty as a friend to listen and offer advice, but it's not your responsibility to parent them. See the difference? So the situation all depends. Is it our responsibility as a society to look after the poor and starving? Some might say so, some might say those people have others who should look after themselves.

When you start beating your self ..

It's the difference between a hand-out and a hand-up. Help those who are helping themselves and working hard at correcting their situation. Those are the people who need the break and the helping hand. If you are only offering handouts then you're an enabler to their lack of action.

Your best friend, as example, has had yet another painful breakup. Empathy is called for, but if this person is repeating the same bad habits and tendencies then reassuring them is not helpful, whereas a metaphorical kick in the butt might be more useful.

You have to make a judgement call with incoming adults -

"is this person part of the bonus, or part of the suck?"

bonus people add more to those around them in some way - whether its pleasure, or generosity or learning (which can be hard) these people tend to be optimistic by nature (though they often don't say so)

the suck are just never going to get enough, never going to be satisfied, always taking from you, and the planet, feeling the world owes them something, always being loudly pessimistic and cynical...

My advice to myself is to steer well clear of those suckers.

Team SP

@CultLeaderPancake Dallas

Follow Message

More Conversations from CultLeaderPancake

If you HAD to have one word tattooed across your entire forehead, which word would you choose? 23 Responses If voting changed anything they'd make it illegal 11 Responses If you died doing what you loved, what would you be doing? 30 Responses Are you thanking the right people? 13 Responses When have you defied the odds? 12 Responses

Show More ↓

SoulPancake

CultLeaderPancake

When do you cross the line from compassionate to chump?

MarkOKC

ronnivp

I would think each individual makes a judgment call on a case-by-case basis according to their intuition, knowledge, wisdom and promptings in this regard.

Shane

I think you cross the line when people take advantage of you and you don't put them in their place.

sparkgirl

ashleyrae

Inzababa

TheEgoist

4Laine

The line is where you draw it. Before getting involved, determine your own limits time-wise, financially, emotionally, etc.

Griz

insincerelyme

pain1990

When you start beating your self ..

burnabymike

flashbanding

When do you cross the line from compassionate to chump?

I would think each individual makes a judgment call on a case-by-case basis according to their intuition, knowledge, wisdom and promptings in this regard.

I think you cross the line when people take advantage of you and you don't put them in their place.

The line is where you draw it. Before getting involved, determine your own limits time-wise, financially, emotionally, etc.

When you start beating your self ..

What's Next?