AIBU to think people should say what they fucking mean?

[LashesandLipstick]

Inspired by threads in which I was told asking a question is rude because "people feel awkward saying no" and "if the person wants to, offer to do it yourself and if they want to they'll tell you not to and offer instead"

AIBU to think people shouldn't play these stupid games? Just say what you mean for Christs sake. I'm sure an adult can take you politely saying no to a request. All this does is cause confusion and create weird social norms that make no sense and confuse the hell out of people who aren't neurotypical or who are foreign.

Stop it.

Did I say she had been to all these schools? No

Given dds issues we visited or spoke to most schools and her Senco helped us out with her knowledge of local schools.

I live in a council boundry and so had to look in 2 areas.

I think a lot of things would be a lot easier if people just said what they meant rather than 'trying to be polite' but I think there are situations where being completely blunt can be unkind/insensitive. I think you have to try to find a happy medium.

NRomanoff, no, you shouldn't be expected to change your mind simply because a lot of people think differently. It would be nice if people could accept that a minority opinion is still an opinion and people are entitled to have one. This seems to pass some MNers by.

Dowager 'BAM an atmosphere has been created'

Person A has upset / annoyed Person B
Person B explains why they are upset / annoyed
Person A feels that there is an atmosphere
And the lesson is not that Person A should learn how not to upset Person B - oh no there might BAM be an atmosphere - according to your way of thinking Person B should suck it up leaving Person A free to carry on upsetting / annoying Persons C D and E

I am trying to solicit empathy for the position I hold but am told 'it's been explain numerous time' as though that should make me go 'oh yes you are right'

That's interesting - we read that sentence very differently. I see that as an attempt to explain why people behave in certain ways, not to try to convince you to behave in that particular way or to turn to you that way of thinking.

It's a response to a dogged 'but it doesn't make sense/it's wrong'. People are trying to make you understand why a certain behaviour makes sense to them.

Again a social construct that say because more people think something is right, then everyone else should stop going on about it.

Does it? Again, that's not how I've read the majority of this thread. A lot of people have put a lot of effort into explaining why people might behave the way that they do, in a way that appears - and possibly objectively is - irrational and illogical. I don't think it's done with an end point in view of trying to get everyone to think or behave in the same way because as this thread has shown there is so much variation in cultural and behavioural norms. (As I've said, I'm an immigrant, there is plenty that I find weird and irrational.)

I don't really think this is a 'mind changing' thread, unless it's 'I'm trying to change your mind that people who behave in X way are stupid, irritating and doing it just to fuck things up for everyone else'.

For me, the objective is to help people understand each other's behaviour better. Lashes asked a question as the subject of the thread. Most of the responses have been an attempt to answer that question.

Why point out its been explained numerous times then?

And in relation to the 30 some schools, I was clearly correct.

Dd did not get a place at our chosen school. We won on appeal because we successfully showed that this school was the only school that could meet our dds needs and continue to improve her ability to speak up for herself.

The appeal panel and even the school representative and council representative agreed when we laid everything out for them.

So I would say my research was correct and though enough. Since we were the first family to win an appeal in 4 years.

Why point out its been explained numerous times then?

I suspect people felt they weren't being listened to, or that their viewpoint was being dismissed as wrong or irrelevant. That's certainly how I feel on this thread - an attempt to explain why people behave the way I do is completely dismissed, often quite aggressively.

And in relation to the 30 some schools, I was clearly correct.

I'm sorry if I upset you by not responding to that - I thought my post was too long already! I'm glad you found school that worked for you, and I know nothing about your individual situation. I'm just not sure you can definitively judge the culture of 30 schools without having experienced the culture.

And thank you bumble

an attempt to explain why people behave the way I do is completely dismissed

Argh - that should have been 'behave the way they do'. Trying to do too many things at once!

It wasn't just my snap shot. The Senco at her current school, the council, the appeal board, and the school she is now going to agreed with the conclusions

I think a lot of things would be a lot easier if people just said what they meant rather than 'trying to be polite' but I think there are situations where being completely blunt can be unkind/insensitive. I think you have to try to find a happy medium.

This!

It is cultural in the UK (England?) to go around the houses, but more so in the south I think. Northerners tend (gross overgeneralisation alert!) to be more honest and blunt.

I always thought I could be fairly tactless but had a German friend (she was from the North as well, near the Danish border) who occasionally was so tactless that she took my breath away!

I won't do something I really don't want to do to be polite, even if the person is going to be offended. For example, eating something I really don't like, or am too full, to eat. Aren't they being rude trying to force me to eat something I don't want anyway? It's being "hospitable". But is it? Surely hospitable is taking account of what your guests actually WANT?

It wasn't just my snap shot. The Senco at her current school, the council, the appeal board, and the school she is now going to agreed with the conclusions

I've accepted that I know nothing about the specific situation, and I apologise for raising it or giving the impression that I did.

However, I don't draw back from my comment about the interplay between closed organisational cultures and the wider social context.

I won't do something I really don't want to do to be polite, even if the person is going to be offended. For example, eating something I really don't like, or am too full, to eat. Aren't they being rude trying to force me to eat something I don't want anyway? It's being "hospitable". But is it? Surely hospitable is taking account of what your guests actually WANT?

This is the cost benefit, isn't it? What's the cost to me of fulfilling this person's wants? Is it greater than I am willing to pay? Do I find their wants reasonable and do I feel they are taking account of mine

Also underlines the fact that the 'rules' are in fact pretty broad, fluid and have specific cultural contexts.

I personally would have said no in a polite and firm fashion to the chap who wanted a chicken breast at the elaborate banquet. And assumed that he would accept 'No' as a complete sentence. Of course if he didn't and wanted to ask why, it would have got more unpleasant. Or alternatively sulked because I said no and resented me for that.

How many adults willingly and happily accept No as an answer? Which is why I am guessing so many shops resort to the 'its Company Policy' line...

I have a son on the spectrum and he NEVER accepts No as an answer. He always wants to know why and he will then argue against my reasons until the cows come home. And frequently we end up with that domestic version of 'Company Policy' ..'Because I said so!'

I don't think there is any virtue in being straightforward if you risk offending or stressing anyone out. There were far easier solutions to the situation than putting the onus on an already stressed and overworked host.

I have explained my position 'countless times' and you don't agree with me. So why is it I should have to change my opinon?

You don't have to. Clearly you're not going to.

But you, and Lashes, keep asking and asking and asking, so we keep explaining and explaining and explaining. And then you ask, and refute again. And people respond.

You don't get it. That much is clear. You don't have to change your opinion, but as long as you keep refusing to get it, and putting up roadblocks, people will keep responding and trying to explain. And you will continue not understanding.

There is no solution here. It is what it is. Things may change, but not in our generation, and likely never to the extent that you'd be happy with because your goalposts move all the time and you're inconsistent. So ... meh.

I have had a quick look at the dinner thread, But not all of it. Because it's huge!

However, I think the co host (whose partner want plain chicken) should have known and informed her of this when they were planning the menu. The co host must have known this would happen

No I dont keep asking. People are making points and I am discussing my view on it, which is what everyone is doing.

Maybe I also don't understand what a debate it either.

Why the passive aggression Doweger?

I am not moving the goal posts. I am debating, which you are clearly unhappy with?

It's seems you are allowed your view but no one else is? Which, imp, is far ruder than people being honest.

You keep refuting.

And that's fine. But it invites a response.

Why do you think I'm allowed a view and no-one else is?

It's an open thread. I'm just disagreeing with you; not forbidding you to participate or express an opinion.

People often say this on Mumsnet, especially when they hold a minority view. It's odd. It's an open forum. People disagreeing with you isn't akin to denying you a 'voice'...

No I dont keep asking. People are making points and I am discussing my view on it, which is what everyone is doing.

I think for me the issue is that in your responses, you're coming across as telling people that the way they feel and react is wrong, or incorrect, or invalid. You are coming across as refuting or dismissing, not listening.

So the conversation goes:

'People doing X is stupid'
'Here's why I think people do X, and here's how I feel/react when people do Y.'
'But people doing X is stupid, and you shouldn't feel that way when people do Y, you should react differently, say in Z way, and the world would be better.'
'If people did Z, it would likely lead to a negative outcome.'
'Well it shouldn't and that's stupid.'

And for the record, I'm far more willing and able to be open and honest on an anonymous internet forum, than I ever would be in real life.

But, ironically, it appears that my open, frank and honest thoughts on this topic aren't exactly being well received by certain quarters.

It's not what you are saying about disagreeing it's the crossing out of pa statements. It's the 'it's not going to happen in your life time!'

jassy is readings response in a way not intended, maybe I am reading yours in way not intended.

The conversation isnt as jassy describes. It some people putting a point and people responding.

I am listening. I just don't agree. That's the problem. I see situations differently and feel in the long run, that if people were more honest and not afraid to cause offence the world would be better. You disagree and that's fine. You are countering my points, that's fine.

You openness is welcomed, completely. I find your posts PA. I am being honest and telling you that. I am not uncomfortable in telling you that or uncomfortable in your reactions.

That's fine. I'm happy to be honest, too.

I think the conversation is exactly as Jassy describes.

Which one of us is right?

In fact, this could be downright refreshing.

Do you actually want to know how I find your posts on this particular thread, and the judgment I'm forming about you?