A Debate! We Loves a Debate!

Okay, a moral debate for you.
I made the off-hand comment on my other blog that I was surprised to be taken so aback by the Crocodile Hunter’s (Steve Irwin) death. I said, “well, it computes. Play with dangerous animals, die at their hands.”
A reader then commented, “All I can say is I hope he has a large insurance policy for his wife and child. There’s a point where self has to take a back seat to the others in your life.”
And I guess it just had me thinking. How true is that statement? How much can we expect a lover to yield to us after the pact between us has been made to share our lives? If you’re someone like Terri Irwin, and you fall for this wacky, crazy guy who does more with dangerous animals in any given day than the average person can expect in a lifetime, are you right in expecting them to dial back the nature of who they are in the interest of ensuring longevity in your relationship? Is the relationship even worth it, if it means removing the element of danger from their life changes them into a different kind of person?
And don’t try to confuse the question by factoring into the argument his two children. The trouble with children is, they take everything hard. The trouble with life is, it’s hard. The trouble with parents is, they don’t ever want their children to learn this inrguable fact.
So, what do you think? When you get involved with someone who’s a risk-taker, is that risk-taking an intrinsic part of who they are, and you, as their lover and with a vested interest in keeping them alive, do you have any right in asking them to change their ways solely for your benefit?

6 thoughts on “A Debate! We Loves a Debate!

  1. hanh

    Seeing as how we have a bunch of scaredy cats (or everyone’s still at work) I’ll get the ball rolling.

    I’m inclined to think you are. To an extent. You have to walk into a pact like that knowing full well that the other person is always going to be a certain way. If they’re the adventurous type, they’re going to always be that way. When you start stifling a person, or force them to change, they will eventually revert back to their original personality. Think mid-life crisis.

    This doesn’t mean a person won’t change. They just have to do it on their own. Persuaded if you will.

    And I just lost my train of thought.

  2. roscoe

    Your kidding right?

    The hardest thing in life is to excell at being 100% who you are, true to a fault Steve Irwin lived HIS life, not the one someone wanted to live…

    The originator of the idea for this topic must be living in a world where at least once or twice a day they look in the mirror and HATE their life…

    I do not understand how as a person one can LIVE for someone else?

    To live to share joy, or passions or to SHARE everyday life with someone is amazing, to give up who you are for someone?

    To not be who you truly are???


    To fall to the wants of “percieved happiness” or the idea of “ok I have to quit being me, I’m a grown up” is bullshit…

    Ideas people have about giving up who they truly are and do what others want them to make me nuts, why dream then…you certainly are not living…

    Exisitng is NOT life…no matter how many Porsche’s you have or how big the house is…

    Maybe I’m off topic now but I hear this kind of shit everyday from friends of mine…

    I’m living the dream I had as a young child, doing things I never would have thought I would ever be able to do becaue I followed my heart and I am living my life my way, sometimes to a fault I guess if I were listening to society…I’m not!

    Steve Irwin was awesome, he lived HIS life, comments hoping for an Insurance policy make me nuts…his wife knew who he was when she married him, she knew how he was going to die, so did he, but they made a choice to live life and not worry about the end…

    Some people’s idea of living must be different than mine…

    RIP Steve

  3. scribe called steff

    Roscoe — I’d never kid about something like this. I’m interested in seeing what the opinions are. I’m curious if more women think along this line than men or what. I’ll weigh in later.

  4. Dark Horse

    I don’t think you can truly compromise who you are, even for a deep and abiding love, and be happy. I don’t believe you can spend every day wearing someone else’s mask, someone else’s life, and not be dying inside by inches.

    If you try… either your true self emerges, whether you want it to or not, or you very slowly die inside. You stop being you, but don’t really become anyone else either.

    I’ve tried. It didn’t work. I’d never, ever compromise the truth of who I am for anyone or anything ever again.

    That said, if I were Steve Irwin’s wife, I would have demanded he have decent life insurance – for the sake of providing for his children. I’d hope like hell he came home every day, and I’d probably dread the phone call. But I wouldn’t try and stop him.

    Why choose someone if all you want to do is change them? Why not go find the person you wanted to change them into instead?

  5. Anonymous

    I don’t think anyone should change who they are for the sake of a relationship. Terri Irwin knew just who was standing beside her in life, and I imagine his ability to live so fully was part of why she loved him.

    If you have children, I believe you owe it to them to secure their futures in case something happens to you – you chose to have them, after all – but not to give up who you are for them. If you follow your passions, chances are you children will learn to do the same thing, and isn’t that what most of us want for them?

    I have often heard people consoled by the notion that someone died “doing something he loved”. If I can’t have my first choice and be old and in a rocking chair somewhere drifting off to glorious memories, then I’d pick going out in a moment of joy, doing something I’m passionate about.


Comments are closed.