What should i do...

[Guest bigTom]

Doing something out of guilt alone is futile, frustrating, and fruitless. You will end up angry with yourself and your brother. Doing something to help out of true compassion is commendable, but giving/lending money to a loser will not change them.

[Guest biga]

Hi guys thanks for all the wise words, after a day spent mainly on the telephone to various members of my family i have decided what to do.

I have found out that my brothers total debts are £153,000($215,000)including $43,000 owed to other memebers of my family who have lent him money over the last few months,through a mediator(my sister) i have agreed to buy his house for the total amount of his debts i.e $215,000 this will keep him from bankrupcy and let his family have a roof over their heads,i am going to let them live there rent free for a period of six months but the house and deeds will be mine,he apparently got himself into the mess he is in by a combination of bad business sense and living beyond his means ,i know i must be insane to do this but it is his wife and children i am thinking of as well as the rest of the family ,one of my brothers is in financial difficulties because of a loan he took out to help him ,but i think i have come out pretty well as far as i know if this goes throught i will have made a substanial profit on the value of the house

THANKS BIG A (LONDON )

[Guest]

>...through a mediator(my

>sister) i have agreed to

>buy his house for the

>total amount of his debts

>i.e $215,000 this will keep

>him from bankrupcy and let

>his family have a roof

>over their heads,i am going

>to let them live there

>rent free for a period

>of six months but the

>house and deeds will be

>mine,he apparently got himself into

>the mess he is in

>by a combination of bad

>business sense and living beyond

>his means ,i know i

>must be insane to do

>this

 

Let me get this "straight." This guy won't even TALK to you (you have to communicate through a "mediator"), and you're putting up $215,000 because he's been living beyond his means? Is this a joke, or have you internalized your brother's homophobia, or what? And what are you going to do when they give you the finger in 6 months (and they will)? Evict them?

[BewareofNick]

>In the culture in which I

>was raised nothing is more

>important than family. All

>other relationships are transitory.

>Family is forever. No

>matter what he said or

>did to you in the

>past nothing can change the

>fact that your brother is

>still the child of your

>mother and father and the

>time will come when he

>and your other siblings if

>any are the only connection

>you have with your parents.

> That of course does

>not mean you should always

>do whatever they ask of

>you. If you suspect he

>wants to reconcile with you,

>meet him and see for

>yourself. If you believe

>he is sincere in wanting

>a relationship with you then

>give him what he needs.

>

 

 

Family is not about biology. Family is about what's in your heart, and his brother excluded him from his heart long ago.

[Guest jizzdepapi]

why are people still advising big a? he's announced his decision which sounds pretty final (with which i don't agree either, but that's beside the point).

 

big a, i would do one other thing for your brother, which would probably prove more valuable than your very generous offer to bail him out.

 

debtors anonymous is a 12-step program which helps people who are growing out of control with "debting" behavior. sounds like your brother engages in this behavior. members of DA also believe in "debting" relationships, in that though your brother has rejected you for many years, he now has managed to get money from you to bail him out of yet another financial emergency. wouldn't hurt for him to check this group out; we're mostly assuming your brother is a deadbeat and willfully engaging in this behavior when possibly he finds himself acting compulsively in many areas of his life.

 

anyway, here's a link:

 

http://www.debtorsanonymous.org

[Guest biga]

Afternoon guys,just a quick update to what has been happening,i received a phone call from my sister about 30 minutes ago to tell me that my brother had rejected the deal that i had put to him this means that i am not going to do any more to help him,i think what i offered went above and beyond the call of duty as it were only to see it thrown back into my face,it seems to me now that the only option open to him is bankruptcy which maybe the best option after all,i have told my sister who was quite upset that i will pay back the monies owed by him to the rest of the family which come to just over $40,000 so at least they will not be hurt obviously if bankruptcy occurs they will be out of pocket which i dont want them to be as i do have a relationship with them,hopefully this will be the last i hear on the matter THANKS BIG A (ANDY)LONDON UK

[CT Dick]

Good for you, Andy.

 

You took DCescortBOY's advice: <<you always win when you take the high road.>> I think he's right.

 

You made a massively generous offer and are bailing out the family in spite of your brother's treatment of you. THAT is the high road.

 

Dick

[Guest]

Boy is that right! The fact that the poster and his brother aren't even talking about this matter with eachother pretty much disproves the theory that the brother is interested in reconciliation.

[Guest]

>You made a massively generous offer

>and are bailing out the

>family in spite of your

>brother's treatment of you.

>THAT is the high road.

 

So proclaims "CT Dick," the official "high road" designator. As for my opinion, I don't think letting oneself be manipulated by a sociopath who puts his hatred for his brother over his family's welfare constitutes taking the high road. It was clearly obvious, even before the rejection of A's generous (but may I say misguided) offer, that the brother had no intention of changing either his feelings for the poster or his wreckless financial behavior. The brother will have to declare bankruptcy at some point--either before of after more bailout(s). I can promise you, CT dick, that when generosity merely enables self-destructive behavior, the generosity only does harm. You might want to follow the link given by a previous resonder to the compulsive debtors' site. You might learn a lot about the harm of enabling.

[Guest jizzdepapi]

a little harsh here, unicorn, eh?

[Guest Charon]

Best of Luck to you. I hope it works out.

[BewareofNick]

Big a, your name should be big heart.

 

You almost ended up in a no win situation and now you have come out on top. You made the best offer you reasonably could and it was rejected, much as your brother rejected you all those years ago.

 

And repaying your brother's debts to your family? I wouldn't do it, but you are truly the better man. Anyone would be lucky to have you for a friend.

 

Or a brother

[Guest delhi]

>Family is not about biology.

>Family is about what's in

>your heart, and his brother

>excluded him from his heart

>long ago.

 

That is an idea that may be popular in some parts of this country but which has nothing to do with most of the world's cultures, including mine.

 

If you feel qualified to tell us what is in the hearts of people you have never even met, you are free to do so. To me it seems incredibly presumptuous, so I won't do that.

[BewareofNick]

>If you feel qualified to tell

>us what is in the

>hearts of people you have

>never even met, you are

>free to do so.

>To me it seems incredibly

>presumptuous, so I won't do

>that.

 

 

Of course I am free to do so. It is my opinion. If in your culture, you value your blood ties over other relationships, that is your right and your perogative. I choose to disagree. No presumption there.

[johnnysneakers]

BigA:

 

Since you mentioned it, I do not think profit should have been your motive on your offer; still it might be nice, but you do not want to be seen profiting from someone else's misery. You are clearly a man of means, and your brother further resents you for it.

 

I think you made your brother a decent offer, but obviously he felt either distrust of you, or fear of your control over his life. If the latter is the case, this guy has real problems. If former, that is just more homophobia.

 

You made a generous offer, one that I am not sure I would have done, but at this point you need to make sure all your relatives, and his wife, know you made this offer which he rejected. You are now dealing in the post facio period of the broken deal. Perceptions are as important as facts at these moments. Protect yourself.

[Guest]

>>Family is not about biology.

>>Family is about what's in

>>your heart, and his brother

>>excluded him from his heart

>>long ago.

>

>That is an idea that may

>be popular in some parts

>of this country but which

>has nothing to do with

>most of the world's cultures,

>including mine.

>

>If you feel qualified to tell

>us what is in the

>hearts of people you have

>never even met, you are

>free to do so.

>To me it seems incredibly

>presumptuous, so I won't do

>that.

 

Wow. We have an expert on what peoples' values are in most of the world's cultures here. I don't think it takes a genius, though, to figure out what's in the heart of someone who wishes the poster and his boyfriend dead. I'll give you a hint: IT'S NOT BROTHERLY LOVE. But if you want to throw away $200,000 at someone who wishes you and your boyfriend dead, go ahead. Somehow I doubt most people on this planet would.

[Guest delhi]

>Wow. We have an expert

>on what peoples' values are

>in most of the world's

>cultures here.

 

In case you've never heard of them, they're called "cultural anthropologists."

 

>I don't

>think it takes a genius,

>though, to figure out what's

>in the heart of someone

>who wishes the poster and

>his boyfriend dead. I'll

>give you a hint:

>IT'S NOT BROTHERLY LOVE.

>But if you want to

>throw away $200,000 at someone

>who wishes you and your

>boyfriend dead, go ahead.

>Somehow I doubt most people

>on this planet would.

 

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the harsh remarks you've made to me and a couple of other posters here have more to do with something that happened in your life than with something that is happening to some other people you don't even know. Whoever it was that hurt you it wasn't us, so find some way of dealing with it other than taking it out on us.

[Guest Joey Ciccone]

>As for my opinion, I don't think letting oneself be manipulated by a sociopath who puts his hatred for his brother over his family's welfare constitutes taking the high road.... As a physician who works with poor people......<

 

That's some bedside manner you've got there. And some keen insights. I'll bet your patients love you dearly. I hope no one takes that bet. Losing might make me just another enabled sociopath!

[Guest]

>In case you've never heard of

>them, they're called "cultural anthropologists."

 

Oh, I recently read the book "Out in the World" by Neil Miller. From the research he presented, in most of the cultures he studied, societal approval for same-sex couples settling in together with their family's approval is the exception rather than the rule. (The same holds true for societal approval for sex work I might add). Firstly, just because "everybody does it" doesn't mean it's wise or right. Secondly, if you think that most people on this planet would put up a large sum of money to help a brother who wished him and his lover dead... well, I think you're deluding yourself.

 

>It doesn't take a genius to

>figure out that the harsh

>remarks you've made to me

>and a couple of other

>posters here have more to

>do with something that happened

>in your life than with

>something that is happening to

>some other people you don't

>even know. Whoever it

>was that hurt you it

>wasn't us, so find some

>way of dealing with it

>other than taking it out

>on us.

 

You're wrong again on this one, Professor Sherlock Holmes. Although most gay men have had their share rejection from loved ones, in my case I've been fortunate to have had only acceptance from my family and friends. Certainly no one's wished me and my boyfriend dead, let alone criticized the way I live my life (well, I once had a neighbor who didn't like a tree I planted in my yard, but no one's life is completely charmed). Nor have I had any immediate family members who've engaged in self-destructive behavior and been the victims of enabling. Nevertheless, I've seen the destructive effects of enabling behavior on others (patients, friends).

Nor do I think my comments were harsh. You implied that in most of the world's cultures, a brother would "let bygones be bygones" and ignore the death wishes. I felt that opinion to be bombastic and I said so. I didn't imply your opinions came from personal experiences in your life, as you did.

On the subject of how one's past experiences affect one's opinions, however, I'm going to jump to a (perhaps incorrect) conclusion that your user ID Delhi refers to your growing up in an Indian culture. Well, I visited a few states there two years ago, and I read up on Indian culture before I left, and I read the local newspapers while I was there. One of the things I read was that in India, by conservative estimates, 75% of married women are beaten by their husbands (some actually burned alive). Yet the women almost never complain because of Indian "family values" (i.e. the culture accepts it).

As gay men, we have all also seen the harm that can come from "traditional family values." And I will speak up when I think someone is being abused (even if it's just emotionally).

[Guest]

You're right. I did word it a little harshly. I apologize to CT Dick. Still, it does seem a little pompous to tautologically declare one's opinion "the high road." If someone believes his opinion is correct, he should offer reasons, rather than simply declare the opinion is superior to others'.

[CT Dick]

Accepted. Thank you.

 

I understand "the high road" as the positive choice. Between not helping his brother or lending him the money, I mean (and I assume DCescortBOY meant) that forgiving and lending was taking the high road.

 

I did not mean that Biga agreed with me. In fact, I recommended that he review why his family wasn't helping.

 

Dick

[Guest delhi]

>Oh, I recently read the book

>"Out in the World" by

>Neil Miller. From the

>research he presented, in most

>of the cultures he studied,

>societal approval for same-sex couples

>settling in together with their

>family's approval is the exception

>rather than the rule.

>(The same holds true for

>societal approval for sex work

>I might add).

 

So what? Neither of those issues has anything to do with the point I made.

 

>You're wrong again on this one,

>Professor Sherlock Holmes. Although

>most gay men have had

>their share rejection from loved

>ones, in my case I've

>been fortunate to have had

>only acceptance from my family

>and friends.

 

Okay, have it your own way. You've been insulting with me and a couple of other people on this board not because you were traumatized by similar experiences in your own life but because you don't have the maturity to discuss this subject without attacking people who disagree with you. If you insist on that explanation, I won't argue with you.

 

>Nor do I think my comments

>were harsh.

 

Obviously, several others disagree, including me. You come off as an extremely unpleasant person. Is it intentional?

 

>Yet the

>women almost never complain because

>of Indian "family values" (i.e.

>the culture accepts it).

>As gay men, we have all

>also seen the harm that

>can come from "traditional family

>values." And I will

>speak up when I think

>someone is being abused (even

>if it's just emotionally).

 

It's absurd for you to pretend that the nasty remarks you've made to me and others here are helping the people of India, the thread author or anyone else. Their only purpose is to allow you to enjoy putting other people down. How sad.

[Guest]

>>Oh, I recently read the book

>>"Out in the World" by

>>Neil Miller. From the

>>research he presented, in most

>>of the cultures he studied,

>>societal approval for same-sex couples

>>settling in together with their

>>family's approval is the exception

>>rather than the rule.

>>(The same holds true for

>>societal approval for sex work

>>I might add).

>

>So what? Neither of those

>issues has anything to do

>with the point I made.

>

To use your phrase, "it doesn't take a genius" to figure out the point is that just because certain cultures have certain "family values" doesn't mean we need to blindly follow them. You opined that most cultures put traditional family ties above all (or common sense, in this case). I showed counter-examples that most people on this board would probably agree with.

 

>>You're wrong again on this one,

>>Professor Sherlock Holmes. Although

>>most gay men have had

>>their share rejection from loved

>>ones, in my case I've

>>been fortunate to have had

>>only acceptance from my family

>>and friends.

>>Nor do I think my comments

>>were harsh.

>

>Obviously, several others disagree, including me.

> You come off as

>an extremely unpleasant person.

>Is it intentional?

>

Several? Perhaps you're counting the voices in your head. One person pointed out that my comment to CT Dick was a little strong, and I agreed and apologized. Have you heard of the expression "like the pot calling the kettle black"? Why don't you review this thread. Beware of Nick gave a poignant testimonial and commented "family is about what's in your heart." Before I even entered that sub-string, you called him "incredibly presumptuous" and chided him for trying to deduce BigA's brother's feelings. Yet two messages down you're making your own deductions (on far less evidence) about my family experiences. Talk about being "incredibly presumptuous"! It's the height of hypocrisy. You then implied your opinion coincided with "most of the world's cultures." I could have called you "incredibly arrogant" (or presumptuous) to put yourself as an expert on "most of the world's cultures." My response was quite muted compared to yours. "First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye."

 

>>Yet the

>>women almost never complain because

>>of Indian "family values" (i.e.

>>the culture accepts it).

>>As gay men, we have all

>>also seen the harm that

>>can come from "traditional family

>>values." And I will

>>speak up when I think

>>someone is being abused (even

>>if it's just emotionally).

>

>It's absurd for you to pretend

>that the nasty remarks you've

>made to me and others

>here are helping the people

>of India, the thread author

>or anyone else. Their

>only purpose is to allow

>you to enjoy putting other

>people down. How sad.

>

My dear, it was you who began by implying that my views were being tainted by a dysfunctional family background. The purposes of that paragraph were to (1) point out how I too can make deductions of how your past has influenced your opinions, and (2) point out that there are very dysfunctional traditions regarding the nature of an ideal family in many cultures (although I wouldn't go so far as to say "most of the world's cultures"). Others' traditions shouldn't blind one to common sense. So.... don't dish it out if you can't take it, sir. You haven't exactly been Mr. Pleasant yourself, starting with your comments to Beware of Nick.

[Guest regulation]

>To use your phrase, "it doesn't

>take a genius" to figure

>out the point is that

>just because certain cultures have

>certain "family values" doesn't mean

>we need to blindly follow

>them. You opined that

>most cultures put traditional family

>ties above all (or common

>sense, in this case).

>I showed counter-examples that most

>people on this board would

>probably agree with.

>

 

Since you horned in on a conversation in this thread in which none of the posts was addressed to you, I'm sure you won't mind my doing the same thing now, right?

 

I don't agree with your characterization of your remarks. Like delhi, I don't think what you said about the way other cultures regard same-sex relationships or sex workers has anything to do with the point he made, which is that most cultures consider family relationships far more important than others. That is a very simple point and one which I believe to be beyond dispute. I see nothing in any of your posts that refutes it. And he said nothing about "blindly following" anything. His advice was that the thread author should help his relative IF he believes that the man genuinely wants a reconciliation. Frankly I don't see how anyone can argue with that. And to be accurate, you're not arguing with it. What you seem to be doing is imputing to delhi statements that he never made and then arguing with THAT. I've had that happen to me and I really don't like it. I doubt that anyone does.

 

>>>You're wrong again on this one,

>>>Professor Sherlock Holmes.

 

Is it really necessary to be so nasty?

 

>Several? Perhaps you're counting the

>voices in your head.

 

Speaking of voices in one's head, it seems to me that you are really arguing not with delhi but with a straw man of your own creation. Why? It certainly has nothing to do with helping the thread author, so it must have something to do with issues of your own.

 

As for the number of people who objected to your remarks, I think he's counting what Joey C. said as well. And you can count me in that group too. Is that enough to make "several"?

[Traveller]

> Is that enough to

>make "several"?

>

 

I know it's not enough for egg roll. Very good, however.

 

Later.