The Issue of "Paying Back"

I hope this doesn't intersect too much with the "who pays for children" thread.
Suppose that a child has been brought up since birth by her biological parents. His parents have been everything the ideal parents should be - recognizing the capacity of the child and not pressurizing overly beyond his capability.
At 15 or so, the boy falls in love with someone. His parents pose a thoroughly irrational opposition to the girl - not on the grounds of "you're too young" but "that girl is evil, she's just going to use you" putting forth no reason for their claims.
What is the boy to do? Defy his parents, on whom he is dependent, and to whom he owes his initial upbringing, and go ahead and take the risk or submit to their demands, thus denying reality by faking indifference to the girl?

A purely hypothetical situation.

Neha

Post 1

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 5:56am

Good grief. Taking care of one's own basic needs -- food, clothing, shelter -- trumps all other values. He needs to obey his parents until such time as he can live independently of them. I accept the following propositions as true:

Love can wait.
The world has many compatible mates.
No single potential love partner should ever trump one's highest value -- one's own life.
Never put a lover on a pedestal for worship. Instead, choose to keep that person at all times in context of all other values with yourself as your own highest value.

My views vary somewhat from those of Ayn Rand, perhaps because romance falls near the bottom of my overall values hierarchy.

I disagreed with Romeo and Juliet as well, the brats: "Grow up!"

(Edited by Luke Setzer on 8/22, 6:17am)

Post 2

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 6:24am

The value here isn't "romance" in itself, you know...it is the value that this boy sees in the girl.

Post 3

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 6:41am

I say the boy should see the girl in secret and lie to his parents about it. Love has a special magic intensity at age fifteen and it would be terrible to miss any of it. This is one of those pivotal moments, kind of like when Jean-Luc Picard as a youth got into a bar fight and was stabbed in the heart, that determines the boy's character--will he be docile and submit to irrationality, or will he be a bold adventurer, a daredevil who is willing to take great risks to do what he knows is right. Some of my best memories are of sneaking out in early high school to meet girls in the middle of the night. This is a chance for a kind of forbidden romance that's relatively harmless when you're young and which could only be much more dangerous as an adult. If the boy gets caught, the worst that'll happen is he gets grounded for a couple months--no big deal.

Of course I say all this under the assumption that this fifteen year old guy isn't some idiot who's going to go out and get addicted to drugs, drive drunk, get the girl pregnant, start blowing off school, etc.

Post 4

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 6:48am

"A purely hypothetical situation."

I don't know about that! After watching "Bend It Like Beckham," I have my doubts. There certainly was a ring of truth to the strictness of some families portrayed in the film.

"Defy his parents, on whom he is dependent, and to whom he owes his initial upbringing, and go ahead and take the risk or submit to their demands, thus denying reality by faking indifference to the girl?"

This represents a false alternative. There's no reason whatever for the boy to "fake indifference" to the girl, is there? Unless he's actually indifferent, I can see him communicating his situation to her easily. While upsetting, she really has no alternative but to accept the reality of his predicament.

I certainly agree with Luke on one score: "Love can wait."

Post 5

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 7:27am

I say that the kid should defy his parents. He's got to start cutting the apron strings some time, 15 is as good an age as any, and a girlfriend against whom the parents are irrationally prejudiced is a good reason. And if the girl does use him, what of it? At least he'll learn from the experience and be a stronger man for it.

Post 6

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 7:58am

I knew a girl at high school who got emancipated minor status. She was in a divorce situation and couldn't stand it so she said to hell with both of her parents and paid her own rent by waitressing and playing violin for weddings on the weekends. She continued to go to high school. Her parents couldn't believe it, but I thought it was great. Let them pound sand.

I do agree with Luke that you have to support yourself, but the way society is set up generally precludes autonomy in Western societies until 18 or so.

Jim

Post 7

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 8:09am

Sounds like my kind of girl.

Post 8

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 8:51am

Neha posited: "His parents have been everything the ideal parents should be - recognizing the capacity of the child and not pressurizing overly beyond his capability."

If they are so ideal, then they will have reasons for their judgement. If the son argues his case, these "ideal" parents will have to accept it. (I did... more than once... "OK Kid, you seem to know what you want. Have at it! ... Oh-oh, you got scraped a bit, eh? Well, no big deal. Live and learn. Make all your mistakes while you are young and when you get to my age, you won't have any left.)

I deny that not pushing your kid is "ideal" -- but that is another issue.

Food, clothing, and shelter do not make one an "ideal" parent. That is the default position.

I recommend that the kid lie. See the girl. When it comes to Romance, I have concentric rings over my heart so that Cupid does not miss.

Luke Setzer, Knight Errant. Have no fear, milady! I will rescue thee! <Large ferocious dragon slithers over boulder.> Ragnarok! What a large, ferocious dragon! Well, as I learned in Philosophy: my Major Premise is that my life is my highest value; and my Minor Premise is I must not sacrifice a higher value to a lower value; therefore, I must leave. QED.

Post 9

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 8:57am

Here, draggy-draggy-draggy. I got a nice, fresh Christian virgin for you. That's right, c'mere boy.

*BOOM*

*blows smoke from the barrel of his .45* I always wanted a pair of dragon-hide motorcycle boots. :)

Post 10

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 10:45am

Michael Marotta mocked mercilessly:

Luke Setzer, Knight Errant. Have no fear, milady! I will rescue thee! <Large ferocious dragon slithers over boulder.> Ragnarok! What a large, ferocious dragon! Well, as I learned in Philosophy: my Major Premise is that my life is my highest value; and my Minor Premise is I must not sacrifice a higher value to a lower value; therefore, I must leave. QED.

Very good! You know me well!

Post 11

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 5:47am

It seems to me that the boy needs to do two things. First, he needs to apply his own reason to the reality of the girl and his relationship with her, and decide whether or not he agrees with his parents' view of the matter. Second, if he disagrees with his parents' view, he needs to apply his reason to the reality of his life with his parents and decide whether he can withstand the consequences of going against their wishes. Reaching each of those decisions will probably require getting more data, experimenting with boundaries, and even negotiating.

If the second decision is ultimately that he can't withstand the consequences of going against his parents' wishes, then the rational thing to do is obey his parents. But I don't think that that necessarily means he has to "deny[] reality by faking indifference to the girl." He can still be in love with the girl and obey his parents. There's nothing dishonest about truthfully saying to someone "I love you, but I'm not going to date you anymore because I've decided that I need to obey my parents on this." I think the ability to make tough choices like this, and to live up to them, is an important part of being human -- living by reason.

[Apologies if this post repeats what others have said above. I actually submitted this early on, but since I'm a newbie, it didn't get posted until the gatekeeper had had a chance to look it over.]

(Edited by Jay Pastore on 8/22, 11:42am)

Post 12

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:16am

hmm- that was nighttime in India, therefore I couldn't reply to any of the posts.

This is not such a hypothetical situation after all - the boy is a friend of mine (but I'm not the girl, of course). And Daniel - that is what he has been doing thus far. That is what I have supported too. But of course he would feel terribly guilty about lying to his parents.

Teresa- Love can wait, but why should this boy submit it to an arbitary test, as Eric Segal said? Just because his parents have a thoroughly totalitarian-type objection? What about his individuality, his willingness to see the girl and take the risk, because of his belief in his strength?

Matthew - Yes. Exactly. I agree too.

James - "let them pound sand". Wouldn't that be sort of ungrateful?

MEM - Yes, his parents have been ideal, in that they have mostly left the kid to himself, letting him choose his way in all the things that he has the right to, ie, not letting him make the big decisions about which he is still ignorant, but letting him generally live life his way - till now. Yes, food and shelter do not make an "ideal" parent, but they certainly do make a good, dutiful one, don't they.

Jay - Suppose that whether or not he agrees with his parents (and in this case, he doesn't) he wants to do it, and he is going to. He's quite willing to take the consequences (in objective language - pay the price).

I'm looking forward to the other responses, especially because most of them so happily coincide with my own

Best,
Neha

Post 13

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 5:18am

"Teresa- Love can wait, but why should this boy submit it to an arbitary test, as Eric Segal said? Just because his parents have a thoroughly totalitarian-type objection? What about his individuality, his willingness to see the girl and take the risk, because of his belief in his strength?"

Okay, fine, I've changed my mind...all these guys and their romantic ideals have worked their magic on me. Fine, if the kid loves her, go for it. "Ideal parents" would never stand in the way of a young man's heart anyway, right?? Let him live and learn.

Just don't get into trouble yourself for covering up for the kid!

Post 14

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 7:15am

Yeah, I won't. I don't do that sort of stuff.

Post 15

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 9:05am

Looks like this was put in the wrong place. It seems to be a question for "Dear Tabby" over there in the kitchen.    I'll take a poke at it here though.

Dear Tabby:

At 15 or so, the boy falls in love with someone. His parents pose a thoroughly irrational opposition to the girl - not on the grounds of "you're too young" but "that girl is evil, she's just going to use you" putting forth no reason for their claims. What is the boy to do? Defy his parents, on whom he is dependent, and to whom he owes his initial upbringing, and go ahead and take the risk or submit to their demands, thus denying reality by faking indifference to the girl?

The Girl

******

Dear Girl:

My big question is why do the parents think the girl is evil and has bad intentions? Are they religious and are therefore brand any non-believer as evil?   Would it be more acceptable if the couple were dismissed because of their age? Is there any way of working this out without defying the parents or dismissing the couple. Forbidden fruit only makes the attraction stronger.

As the mother of a 15-year old girl myself, I feel that serious romance at that age is rather premature. I don't want to burst your bubble, but hormones trump reason in the teen years. I'm sure that once my daughter starts dating, some holier than thou parent will have issues and label her as evil probably based on nothing more than the way she dresses. It is part of living in a world where atheists are so rare. After my divorce, I decided that I would rather die old and alone than to date someone religious. Luckily, I finally found my true soulmate, someone who shares my highest values. Someone rational yet passionate. Now we have legal battles to deal with in addition to parents. Not fun either.

This may be your first love, but it probably won't be your last. You will grow and change and so will your partner. Maybe you will grow together or maybe apart. His parents will always be his parents, you may or may not always be his girl. The best thing both of you can do is take it slow. Let the parents get to know that you are a good person with only the best of intentions. They have to open up their minds and their hearts before they will get out of the way. They most likely want what is best for their son, even though it doesn't look that way now. Keep the lines of communication open.

Their opinion of you is not going to change overnight and you certainly don't want to be seen as the evil one who tore him from his family.  He has to make a decision and stick with it, not fake reality. Lying to one's parents is betrayal in my opinion, so I do not condone that.  The parents will then have a valid reason to hate you even more and the son will eventually resent you as well. There may be some of jealousy and fear too.   You are very young and have nothing but time. Use it wisely. Stay strong.

Good luck.

Tabby

(edit - I live in America so if some of the objections are based on social realities in India such as living under a caste system where there are arranged marriages and such, my advice may be completely off. If you are in the lower caste, the parents of the boy will never come around, even if you win a Nobel prize. This is deep in the culture and trying to change centuries of tradition is pretty much a complete waste of effort. You will never be accepted. Culture, like religion, runs deep. So if that is the case, walk away. If I am being totally culturally ignorant and there is an arranged marriage involved here, run for your life or consider eloping.)

(Edited by katdaddy on 8/23, 9:54am)

Post 16

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 6:18am

Neha,

Thanks for your responses. If the boy wants to keep seeing the girl and really is willing to pay the price for it, then I can't see any reason why he shouldn't keep seeing her.

Of course, there is a risk that he will judge poorly. During the 30-plus years since I was 15, I have been madly, devotedly, entirely in love with probably two dozen women. In each case, I was absolutely certain (for a time) that the woman was the one for me, and that I would never love anyone else as much as I loved her. But eventually I did wind up loving another woman just as much . . . and another and another. (I'm married now and have learned to control myself!)

My point is simply that, a few years from now, the boy may decide that the price he paid was too high for the love.

Post 17

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 10:23am

Aw, shucks, wrote Luke Setzer: "Very good! You know me well"

This is why there is a difference between Sense of Life Objectivism and consistent AynRandism.

The Sense of Life imperative is to save the princess. Be a hero! Live your life to the maximum heights for the maximum passion! Of course, it may be a necessarily shorter life.

On the other hand, the doctor told the man to quit drinking, smoking, and sleeping around with strangers. "Will I live longer?" the man asked. "No," replied the doctor. "But it will seem longer."

In my non-cognitive heart, my non-cognitive feelings are ambivalent on this. I am a romantic realist. I am not willing to sacrifice myself for some higher "noble cause" -- and I think the world would be a better place if no one else were, either. "What profit it a man to gain the world and lose his soul?" rests on the assumption that the man gained the world. When I do that, I will consider the alternative.

I have written here before about Merchants Make History by Ernst Samhaber. It is a hardcore, liberal bourgeois view of the last 1000 or so years. Generals get their names in school history textbooks. We memorize the dates of famous treaties. We devote a chapter to the nineteenth century "robber barons" and scoff at the fact that the Founders of our Republic were merchants with private interests. We have this recent post here on SOLO about the heroic vortrekkers of the Orange Free State. The fact that they were Christians who expected an otherworldly reward for their martyrdom made it possible for them to throw their lives away on a dream which others enjoyed after their deaths. I submit that this is not a rational course of action.

Sometimes the world swirls around you and you find yourself in a time and place where being heroic in your last minutes is all you can do. You do it for yourself.

The best course would be get the dragon away from the girl and then go back for her with minimum danger to yourself. "... and so the heroic merchant bribed the dragon. "My negotiator!" the Princess sighed, her breasts heaving against her bodice.")

Post 18

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 10:24am

Neha,

It is difficult for me to suggest something that would work in the culture of the boy's parents, because I don't know what their culture is. A man's relationship to his parents is not chosen, but it is potentially of great value and should not be abandoned except in extremity.

If the boy has sufficient intelligence and social skills, he may be able to negotiate a solution that would not involve a long-term break either with the girl or with his parents. For example, he and his parents might agree that he will see her (in the immediate future) only in his parents' home, with one of his parents nearby. The girl will have a chance to win them over, and the son's negotiating position will become stronger with the passage of time.

The girl can help the boy by working with whatever boundaries the boy negotiates with his parents. For example, it may be helpful to maintain "technical virginity" and not let the young couple's sexual relationship go beyond "the point of no return." Read the section on "Technical Virgins" in "First Love" by Westheimer and Kravetz.

If the boy's parents object to the relationship for reasons of religion or tradition, this can be a useful bargaining chip - just as they don't want to lose their personal relationship with their son, they don't want their son to choose to break with their traditions. With truth and the "trader principle" of your side, you should be able to negotiate a good future for all involved.

Post 19

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:02pm