"All is Fair, In Love And War"

[HiItsMe]

In my other post, someone said they hated this proverb.

 

But, in actuality there some proof to it. If you can snag someone by showing you are the better man/woman or if it's a stalemate, and there's something the other does to get that person interested in them....to "get noticed"...that man/woman might when his prospect over.

 

In fact, I have known marraiges that have come from this.....funny, once a marriage occurs, it all beomce moot wether the person was a jerk for snagging someone else away from someone else.

 

Actually, heard a pastor tell us at a BBQ that is actually he won his wife over.

 

Apparently, at the time, when they were young whippersnappers, she was engaged at the time...but he worked with her closely doing volunteer work.

 

After closing things down for the evening, he asked her to have a drink with him "as friends". No flirting...just talked over a cup o joe.

 

Well, I guess there was something about him that HE had that her fiance' didn't have...thus she broke off the engagement and with her current husband....they were like married for 25 years.

 

Some of the people in the crowd made a face, only because they were on the "receiving" end of getting dumped for the other guy...but I have to say, "That's life" sometimes you have to grin and bite the bullet.

 

I mean, it's not like he/she is cheating on you....you just reassessed things, and figured that you would be better for this new person.

 

So sometimes that's not necessarily a bad thing. I guess that's the purpose of dating/engagements even....to determine wether that person is right for you or not.

 

Sounds like the BBD (Bigger Better Deal) but, those people go through dates like their underwear, which makes me think that one is entitled to a LIMITED amount of BBD's.

 

Now, I'm not talking about tossing someone away like a used article of clothing that you tired of, but, there are always variables....if the person is SERIOUSLY considering changing mates, they really look at the person they are with, vs. the new guy that comes into her life...and there's something about th enew guy (usuallya pesronality trait or value system they share) that sweeps her off her feet, made her feel something that the ohter guy didnt.

 

You've seen the movies, those romantic comedies where there's some engaged or dating woman, and this new "Zany" character comes in, and THEY are the ones that wind up getting hitched.

 

Sure it happens in real life too.

[Stockalone]

I hate "all is fair in love and war" because it implies that people in love and soldiers in wartime are not bound by any rules at all.

 

As ex military and a man who has been in love, I despise that implication with every fiber in my body.

 

I also hate that proverb because most of the time, people will use it when it suits their agenda and then are the first to cry foul once they are on the receiving end.

 

If we are talking about two guys competing for an unattached woman, then I agree with "may the best man win", as you put it in the other thread.

 

If we are talking about a woman in a relationship (which to me inludes having a bf), it is interfering and it shows a lack of character.

[HiItsMe]

I hate "all is fair in love and war" because it implies that people in love and soldiers in wartime are not bound by any rules at all.

 

As ex military and a man who has been in love, I despise that implication with every fiber in my body.

 

I also hate that proverb because most of the time, people will use it when it suits their agenda and then are the first to cry foul once they are on the receiving end.

 

If we are talking about two guys competing for an unattached woman, then I agree with "may the best man win", as you put it in the other thread.

 

If we are talking about a woman in a relationship (which to me inludes having a bf), it is interfering and it shows a lack of character.

 

OKay, I see what you're saying....but in my case (in the other thread) she's not bound to anyone. So I guess that particular situ. would apply?

[Stockalone]

OKay, I see what you're saying....but in my case (in the other thread) she's not bound to anyone. So I guess that particular situ. would apply?

 

Given that she is single, she is fair game.

 

I just find her actions strange (meeting/inviting another guy to the event) and that would bother me.

[Trialbyfire]

I hate "all is fair in love and war" because it implies that people in love and soldiers in wartime are not bound by any rules at all.

 

As ex military and a man who has been in love, I despise that implication with every fiber in my body.

 

I also hate that proverb because most of the time, people will use it when it suits their agenda and then are the first to cry foul once they are on the receiving end.

 

If we are talking about two guys competing for an unattached woman, then I agree with "may the best man win", as you put it in the other thread.

 

If we are talking about a woman in a relationship (which to me inludes having a bf), it is interfering and it shows a lack of character.

I completely agree with this. The reverse holds true with the genders reversed.

[Walk]

If we are talking about two guys competing for an unattached woman, then I agree with "may the best man win", as you put it in the other thread.

 

If we are talking about a woman in a relationship (which to me inludes having a bf), it is interfering and it shows a lack of character.

 

I agree. I wouldn't consider someone a bad person for interferring with a relationship, but I think its kind of hinky.

 

If some woman is doing everything in her power to get my SO, and he dumps me for her... Then I'll fall back on the "all's fair in love and war" line. He wouldn't have dumped me if he were happy with the relationship and satisfied in it. And personally I'd wish him the best of luck with the new lady. She won.. whatever that is worth. She pulled a man who obviously wasn't very committed away from a relationship (he wouldn't have been sucked in by her actions if he was actually committed to the relationship).

 

"All is fair in love and war" is a concept that says you will do whatever it takes to get the prize, to win the war, to conquer your enemy. It doesn't take morality or ethics into consideration. So discussing the ethical or moral attributes of the phrase is moot.

[Stockalone]

I agree. I wouldn't consider someone a bad person for interferring with a relationship, but I think its kind of hinky.

 

They are bad people.

 

 

If some woman is doing everything in her power to get my SO, and he dumps me for her... Then I'll fall back on the "all's fair in love and war" line. He wouldn't have dumped me if he were happy with the relationship and satisfied in it. And personally I'd wish him the best of luck with the new lady. She won.. whatever that is worth. She pulled a man who obviously wasn't very committed away from a relationship (he wouldn't have been sucked in by her actions if he was actually committed to the relationship).

 

I wouldn't fight for a woman who doesn't want to be with me either, but that doesn't mean I woudn't retaliate against the guy who interfered.

 

 

"All is fair in love and war" is a concept that says you will do whatever it takes to get the prize, to win the war, to conquer your enemy. It doesn't take morality or ethics into consideration. So discussing the ethical or moral attributes of the phrase is moot.

 

In the original thread, it was a question

"All is fair, in love and war"?

 

I replied that I hated that proverb. And I disagree with the notion that anarchy is ever acceptable. "All is fair, in love and war?" is not something that I approve of.

 

And anarchy and chaos is all there is in a world without morality and rules, without law and order. In a war, that means rape, pillage, torture and murder.

 

On a personal level, the guy who steals my SO is my enemy. Now, if I would no longer play by the rules, what would I do? If there is no morality holding me back, I would simply kill the guy. That is what a soldier is trained to do. You identify your enemy and when you find an enemy you can kill, you kill him.

 

That is what this proverb implies. As you said, there is no consideration of morality or ethics, there will be no mercy. Proportionality is out of the window. The penalties no longer fit the crime.

 

People who break the rules rely on those they have harmed to play by the rules, to be the bigger person and suck it up.

 

How many people are prepared to see this through? If the gloves came off and stayed off, how many of the people who agree with "All is fair, in love and war" would find it acceptable if I killed them for interfering in my relationship?