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.

I think everyone here can see you're just making yourself look bad, not anyone else.

Gemauve that wasn't my point. My point was I bet most people know more about celebrities than people who have made a contribution. They were examples - I'm very ignorant about nuclear energy but if someone knew a lot about it vs the subjects I know a bit about, I wouldn't dismiss them as unthinking.

But only if they're subjects you think have value? Smashing. What's your opinion on the arts as 'a contribution'? What if someone likes both Heat magazine and particle physics? What if they have thoughts about how to solve the Greek debt crisis but couldn't find Kyrgyzstan on a map?

I think people here seem to think if the majority disagree and you don't change your mind, you're brung difficult

Really? Are we back to this again? You asked, in your threaf title, why people don't behave in the way you'd like them to. A lot of people spent a fair bit of time explaining why they act the way they do. The theory behind why people in general behave the way they do. You responded by saying that their responses didn't make sense, that people who behaved that way we're atupid, just trying to fit in, not thinking for themselves.

Who's tried to get you to change your mind, rather than simply explaining to you why they don't behave the way you want? Some posters have expressed views on their impressions of you from your posts - which I assume you welcome as you value straight talking. That's not trying to change your mind, that's telling you how they perceive you.

You've put an awful lot of effort into telling people the way they think and behave is inferior and society would be better if they changed. Why not just accept the difference and let them be?

The thing is, Lashes, this thread is full of people explaining why these things are offensive and so on. But you seem completely unable to say 'oh, ok, I still don't understand but that's how it is. Now I have a slightly better understanding I can try to apply that, so I don't hurt people's feelings'.

Instead you're saying that everyone unlike you is wrong and unthinking, and don't appear to care when told you have offended people. Now, no one has the right to not be offended, but you seem so completely callous that it is winding people up.

Let me explain.

You are arguing that you, unusually, have the power to see the truth which others cannot, because they are too stupid.

You are claiming, on that basis, to be cleverer that the people whose opinions you dismiss. You are claiming to be a better person than most of those around you.

"I can see the truth, not like all the rest of the idiots" is calling everyone else an idiot. I can't see any evidence from your threads that you are any cleverer or more insightful than anyone else, so it's not at all clear where you get this sense of superiority from. "I know who John Nash is" doesn't quite strike me as enough.

Lashes, your statement about 'thinking for myself' has been described by more than one poster as offensive. If your intention was not to offend, is it worth considering why it may have been construed this way by multiple people?

I'll guve you a starter. You set up the connections of 'people who operate within mainstream cultural norms = not thinking for themselves'.

And thus you are describing the people who have openly and honestly said to you on this post 'I recognise that some of my behaviours, probably more than I realise, are influenced by my culture and upbringing. Some I fight against, but some frankly make my life, and I believe the lives of those around me, easier, happier and richer, so don't see a reason to change, even if it were psychologically possible to undo all conditioning'.

You have told them they are just trying to fit in and can't/don't think for themselves.

Do you understand now?

I am reminded of Mark 6:4

‘But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.’

It’s very true. And that’s why I and so many other people following lashes’s posts fail to appreciate their wisdom.

Though I realise that in asking: ‘what would Jesus do?’ when sorely afflicted, I am amongst legions, and therefore an unthinking sheep.

Jassy, your latter post makes sense to me, I can see why those people may find it offensive. I believe that they are thinking for themselves and have chosen to follow certain norms, something I said earlier was okay. I have had a few posts where they're of the "because it is" mentality and those are who I don't think think for themselves. But you are right that some people who do think for themselves will follow cultural norms.

I suppose it's how I feel when certain feminists try telling me I've been "brainwashed" because I genuinely enjoy certain traditionally feminine things - it does feel like they're being patronising and rude. So I guess I can understand why some people took offense

Regarding liking both "normal" and intellectual things, I have absolutely no problem with that. I like the arts too. In fact providing people are passionate about it I think almost all hobbies are great - I'd just like to see more genuine passion than blank consumerism and celeb culture.

I agree after reading your post I could have worded it and explained it in w much less offensive way. I apologise

Lashes, saying 'I am ok with people following norms for x y and z reason' also comes across as patronising, as if you're giving me permission. It can be seen as if you alone are the arbiter of what is and isn't acceptable, even in my hobbies. Though I am very glad that you have understood why people were offended.

I do think you are helping to illustrate well the limitations of using a direct, confrontational or if you like "honest" style in communicating with others. It is generally counter-productive and alienates those people that you are seeking to engage and persuade your thoughts and ideas have any value.

Seeking to find common ground, areas where people agree, or share values is, in my experience, always more effective and enables people to move forward past a simple this is what I think and want, listen to me.

That is why we have these conventions, that is the main benefit to individuals and the society in which we live. You can still be direct and honest, but you do need to work acknowledging others needs and agree common ground. You have possibly mistaken being honest as needing to somehow avoid using polite and existing social mechanism.

In the Chicken Breast scenario, any need for direct brutal honesty can easily be avoided.

Woman whose husband is a fussy eater could say "wow, the menu is really impressive, everybody is really going to appreciate your hard work. I do have a bit of a problem, quite embarrassed to bring it up, with all the effort you are going to. John has a few issues around what he eats and will only eat plain food, there are a number of options I would like to discuss with you to see whether we can make this work, ...."

It does require thought and care to get this sort of communication right, but we are all intelligent people here, right? It is not really about being honest or not, it's about understanding acknowledging both individuals needs and worth in a dialogue. Actually it's probably being more honest than you choose to be.

Your drive to change the way society works reminds me of my much younger self. As I have become older I realise you can be yourself and work within the main conventions of our society. But first you need to accept, understand and value the benefit of the key rules/norms before you can start to adapt them to your own needs/style.

I believe that they are thinking for themselves and have chosen to follow certain norms, something I said earlier was okay.

I'm sure they're very happy for your approval.

Tell me, are your food issues the results of carefully thinking about what you will and won't eat, and subject to rational change, or are they "just because"?

Boy, just read it back, yeah it can. Not sure how else to word it though?

Silver, that's a very sensible post, and I can see the benefits of that. Perhaps being MORE honest but not as...brutal...as some (myself included) can be would be a good solution

Gemauve they're the result of a medical condition so neither

"Saskia what exactly is that trying to prove? I've never claimed to know everything about everyone ever. No one can. Nor have I claimed to be more intelligent than everyone. I've only said that I think for myself vs following the crowd. God knows why that's so offensive"

I'm not trying to prove anything, just pointing out that suggesting people are unthinking because they may not have knowledge you do is arrogant. I know a lot about all those people, and, in my opinion, they are all important figures. Following your logic, I should dismiss you if you aren't as knowledgeable about them as I am. However, I would never do that, because it would be very rude and elitist.

Gemauve I agree! He is a fascinating character, and very important, especially given the year.

www.stephencovey.com/7habits/7habits-habit4.php

You might find the concept of Win Win enlightening too. It is a little bit Americanised and business negotiation based but the idea that in any human interaction that both people/groups have needs and a solution that works for both is beneficial to all concerned is a useful one.

Thinking around the various discussions on this thread, I think the issues raised are about individuals' psychology rather than cultural or society norms as society. Obviously how an individual behaves is often influenced by the cultural norms they have experienced, but how they choose to operate within those is expressed at an individual level.

What appears to be frustrating you is the way some people accept the social rules without appearing to be challenging them. It is helpful to think about why individuals may prefer or find it easier or less stressful to work within that existing framework, and perhaps why that doesn't work for you and others. There will always be individuals who wish and are able to conform more than others. That doesn't make them less or more intelligent.

I've been following both this thread and the one that inspired it, which was about someone cooking a very elaborate dinner and one guest seeking to vary it.

From what I've learned from Lashes' various responses, I have decided it would be okay for me to say this:

'I am not going to accommodate you because I don't want to. This is no judgment on you.

'You may attend my party. There will be a chair, a plate and cutlery. You may eat a packed lunch if you bring it yourself.

'If, during or after my party, anyone wants to decamp with you to another venue for you to buy food for you - but not to observe you eating it, because that distresses you - that is entirely up to them.'

Have I understood the rules in your world lashes?

Accommodate is wrong. Of course I would accommodate lashes and the putative guest.

I just would not be baking them a plain chicken breast.

Takeaways and crisps are available.

What appears to be frustrating you is the way some people accept the social rules without appearing to be challenging them.

This is exactly it.

It is helpful to think about why individuals may prefer or find it easier or less stressful to work within that existing framework, and perhaps why that doesn't work for you and others.

This is probably a better way of looking at it. I'm reading your link now. Thank you, your posts on this thread have been very helpful!

Limited

Sure I guess? I can't see anything offensive in that but apparently I can't see offense in a lot of things

I've gone and looked up William Marshal now, of whom I'd never heard. Fascinating!

Jassy, your latter post makes sense to me, I can see why those people may find it offensive. I believe that they are thinking for themselves and have chosen to follow certain norms, something I said earlier was okay. I have had a few posts where they're of the "because it is" mentality and those are who I don't think think for themselves. But you are right that some people who do think for themselves will follow cultural norms.

You have formed this belief despite admitting that you know very little about socialisation or the formation of cultural norms, and how they influence behaviour? Don't you think that's the wrong way around.

I'll say it again for good measure - people don't 'follow' cultural norms or the impacts of their socialisation as if it's a diet. Most of the impacts are at the subconscious level. People don't say 'hmm, I'm British, operating within that cultural context, socialised by parents who imprinted me with x, y and z ideas. I'm going to act in line with that socialisation in my upcoming interpersonal encounter'. It's not conscious and many people don't recognise the extent of it - which is why people have expressed how surprised they were to live in a different country, how significantly different interpersonal actions are.

How about reading a few primer websites before deciding people are, or might be, sheep?

I suppose it's how I feel when certain feminists try telling me I've been "brainwashed" because I genuinely enjoy certain traditionally feminine things - it does feel like they're being patronising and rude.

I can see that. It is possible that, while coming across as patronising and rude, they're also right? A number of people have referred on both threads to gender socialisation and its impact on us, including the things we think of as 'feminine' or 'masculine' and how we interact with those concepts. The early gender socialisation of children and infants, and it's impacts, is truly fascinating, particularly when considered cross-culturally.

Regarding liking both "normal" and intellectual things, I have absolutely no problem with that. I like the arts too. In fact providing people are passionate about it I think almost all hobbies are great - I'd just like to see more genuine passion than blank consumerism and celeb culture.

Interesting that these two paragraphs were next to each other. What if someone has a true passion for celeb culture, as you label it? It's nothing new, it's just been called different things over time. It's why I mentioned the arts - I should slso have mentioned sport, which also overlaps with celebrity culture quite significantly. Is it true passion limited only to 'worthy' pursuits or interests?

people don't 'follow' cultural norms or the impacts of their socialisation as if it's a diet. Most of the impacts are at the subconscious level. People don't say 'hmm, I'm British, operating within that cultural context, socialised by parents who imprinted me with x, y and z ideas. I'm going to act in line with that socialisation in my upcoming interpersonal encounter'. It's not conscious and many people don't recognise the extent of it

I agree with that. What makes some people aware of it and others not? THATS what I'm interested in - why do some people become aware? And out of the ones that do, why do some fight it and others accept it?

I can see that. It is possible that, while coming across as patronising and rude, they're also right? A number of people have referred on both threads to gender socialisation and its impact on us, including the things we think of as 'feminine' or 'masculine' and how we interact with those concepts. The early gender socialisation of children and infants, and it's impacts, is truly fascinating, particularly when considered cross-culturally.

In my case id suggest it's unlikely as I was never forced into female gender norms. I often played with masculine toys and had more male friends, and didn't have my parents pushing girly pink toys on me. I was never made to feel wrong for not being girly!

However, that said I also grew up in a family where the mum staying home at least part of the time was normal and it was "expected" that she'd do the domestic work. So maybe that had an impact too?

If someone had a true passion for celeb culture, then I'm cool with that. I guess my problem is people's apathy rather than people not caring about what I like

I agree with that. What makes some people aware of it and others not? THATS what I'm interested in - why do some people become aware? And out of the ones that do, why do some fight it and others accept it?

Reading. Research. Luck. Exposure to people talking about it. An interest in human behaviour that drove them to find out more.

Even the people you think are 'fighting it' are probably only fighting a tiny fraction of the impact of their socialisation and culture on their behaviour. And it's always interesting to consider why they are fighting it - exposure to different cultures or groups who have been socialised differently? Individual psychology is a massive driver, as mentioned upthread.

For example, your examples of socialised/not socialised to gender norms are very high-level and surface, and incredibly unlikely to be the sum total of your socialisation - most of which happens without people realising it. Just as it's incredibly unlikely that your parents were the only influences on how you were socialised. There are some incredibly interesting studies and writings in this field that describe how people talk to and about the foetuses differently if they know boy/girl, without realising they are doing it. And that's before children are exposed to their broader culture from birth.

Socialisation is really the only thing that explains the big differences in gender norms and ideas of what are boy/girl things, roles etc in different cultures.

I must be very lucky in the people I encounter because I see very little apathy - just different interests and different values. But I don't believe that if it's not obvious to me, then it is automatically absent.

Even the people you think are 'fighting it' are probably only fighting a tiny fraction of the impact of their socialisation and culture on their behaviour. And it's always interesting to consider why they are fighting it - exposure to different cultures or groups who have been socialised differently? Individual psychology is a massive driver, as mentioned upthread.

I wonder how much it's possible to truly fight? And like you said the reasons why are interesting

For example, your examples of socialised/not socialised to gender norms are very high-level and surface, and incredibly unlikely to be the sum total of your socialisation - most of which happens without people realising it. Just as it's incredibly unlikely that your parents were the only influences on how you were socialised. There are some incredibly interesting studies and writings in this field that describe how people talk to and about the foetuses differently if they know boy/girl, without realising they are doing it

Can I have the link? I'm very interested in this

I'm in uncomprehending awe of the

Can I have the link? I'm very interested in this

There are many - I will try to post links later, as I'm busy now. But a quick google will set you on the right path.

Click the words, not the picture because the picture doesn't work.

Interlectalls and menser members would work that out.

I'm just saying that for the idiotic sheep amongst you.

Ah limited coming across threads to harass me, mature.

Thanks Jassy :)