Two very ‘wise’ people were trying to settle a dispute. Lets call them, A and B.
So, A is someone who is a a fool for B. and B is …..well in her head the QUEEEEEEEEEEN B.
So B does something something and A is not really happy about it…. and there are bonds, and egos, and attachments and …well ‘history’.
So, B is someone who can be at the same time a friend and a foe for A…but A is just a fool for B.
One day A comes to know a new C. C is a total cup cake….hot, with warmth and refreshing vanilla fragrance with oozing whipped choco creame and cherry on top. Just Yummy!
C and A COULD HAVE a very nice beginning to many nice beginnings and could keep it all nice…. but B got jealous. So she confronted A and well, (A is a fool for B) being himself once again allowed himself to get into the ‘wise sayings of B’ …B who was accused of being nothing but a B **ch, now had to prove herself worthy of what ever she used to get and wanted again, challenged A instead of taking C (the yummiest cup cake 😀 ) to being at a bad position with A like she was to see who stands it and who can’t, henceforth announcing victory to the righteous and the most loving one.
The point is, why would you bring a good thing to a point where is becomes equivalent to a bad thing just to see who behaves in which way? Not considering that in the former case it happened naturally and in the latter it is planned, making it so not the same :P…the first was truly bad the other is faked only to find a fake response even if it favors the cause. 😦
Secondly, being at a bad position is the reason why the first thing could not work … Now, you are bringing another thing to being as bad !….it is just like that you have been sworn a world which is only real if it has been tainted. Not that you can’t live with such scenarios but you never intent to bring things to go down that road 😦
A good thing can remain good without being scarred….just to mark a good thing only for the sake of equalizing it to an already tainted thing is one’s stupidity and very ill intention at the part of the one who made you do it. If there is a motive behind it, how can it ever be used as an objective judgement?
Common sense tells you not to make someone a referee if that person’s own agenda is linked with the matter in any sense of the word. So how can that person’s suggestions be any objective?