So now that the phrase has been determined to probably be "Where's the percentage in...", the actual post that I wanted to use it in:
Where's the percentage in being a really rude, abrasive som'bitch? I know I can get pretty tart myself when I am annoyed with someone for not knowing something (regardless of whether it was reasonable to expect them to know it), which is also bad. But when I have negative opinions about something, I try not to frame them in extremely strong language, nor to be completely dismissive of $WHATEVER. In general I hope I successfully avoid coming across as an all-purpose obnoxious jerk, although I probably do so on accident sometimes.
But why would someone want to do so on purpose, or if not precisely "on purpose", to happily cite "that's just the way I am" as a supposed excuse for generally mean behavior? (For the otherkin out there, "I can't help doing $CRAPPY_ACTION because I am a $SPECIES" is a variant.) I know have no right to dictate others' personal communication styles in situations I don't control, but I really don't get why this makes it "okay" for them to be harsh all the time. It just seems like an incredible waste of energy to be constantly aggressive and I have very little will or desire to engage with it. (Usually I drop out of such arguments after a few exchanges, which sometimes provides fodder for sarcastic "awww, too-sensitive couldn't take the heat! you've just realized that you're WRONG, you just don't want to admit it" sorts of comments, but there's nothing I can do about that; why keep banging my head against a wall, really.)
To me it generally reads as a lack of any basic respect for the thing or person under discussion and for others in the conversation. Why should being addressed in a noncombative manner be a privilege that has to be earned by being "good enough" or "impressive enough"?
In short, I know I am basically a weak, bland personality and this world would be pretty dull if everyone were in fact as, ah, let's say "temperate" as I am, but goddamnit, why do some people have to be so fucking nasty?
Where's the percentage in being a really rude, abrasive som'bitch? I know I can get pretty tart myself when I am annoyed with someone for not knowing something (regardless of whether it was reasonable to expect them to know it), which is also bad. But when I have negative opinions about something, I try not to frame them in extremely strong language, nor to be completely dismissive of $WHATEVER. In general I hope I successfully avoid coming across as an all-purpose obnoxious jerk, although I probably do so on accident sometimes.
But why would someone want to do so on purpose, or if not precisely "on purpose", to happily cite "that's just the way I am" as a supposed excuse for generally mean behavior? (For the otherkin out there, "I can't help doing $CRAPPY_ACTION because I am a $SPECIES" is a variant.) I know have no right to dictate others' personal communication styles in situations I don't control, but I really don't get why this makes it "okay" for them to be harsh all the time. It just seems like an incredible waste of energy to be constantly aggressive and I have very little will or desire to engage with it. (Usually I drop out of such arguments after a few exchanges, which sometimes provides fodder for sarcastic "awww, too-sensitive couldn't take the heat! you've just realized that you're WRONG, you just don't want to admit it" sorts of comments, but there's nothing I can do about that; why keep banging my head against a wall, really.)
To me it generally reads as a lack of any basic respect for the thing or person under discussion and for others in the conversation. Why should being addressed in a noncombative manner be a privilege that has to be earned by being "good enough" or "impressive enough"?
In short, I know I am basically a weak, bland personality and this world would be pretty dull if everyone were in fact as, ah, let's say "temperate" as I am, but goddamnit, why do some people have to be so fucking nasty?
no subject
Date: Mar. 3rd, 2006 04:00 am (UTC)From:The last one is, for me, the one that comes up the most. Calling someone 'dear' that's fucking nasty to me, others think it can be useful or validated. Being agressive - to some it's nasty to other's it's just another form of communication. It's hard to guage, and it's also hard, sometimes, to call someone on what you view as nasty while it is accepted as 'ok' in an environment.
no subject
Date: Mar. 3rd, 2006 04:07 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: Mar. 3rd, 2006 06:24 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: Mar. 3rd, 2006 06:22 am (UTC)From:I guess that leads into your point about what is ok in various environments - friends with a history have a lot more freedom to be assholes with one another because there is an underlying bond to prop it up, or soften it. You know because of past experience that this person is shredding your ideas and is not generally a jerk. From the small window you get of someone on the internet you can't really assume the same. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but of the few things that actually piss me off (I don't have a lot of strong opinions), people being mean apparently for the hell of it is right up there, so when it's all I ever see of someone, I get to the end of my rope now and then.