I’m heading off for new pastures tomorrow and might be offline for a day or so after that til I get all the kinks ironed out, so I thought I would leave you with this, lol.
Perhaps the biggest problem with interaction on blogs is the elusive in definition, yet ever present, “personal attack” or perception of personal attack. Though this video is specifically about race, the method/meta described applies to almost all personal attack situations. It centers on the difference between, the “what they did” conversation as opposed to the “what they are” conversation. And why using personal attack….”what you are”….ends up in flames.
The problem is only exacerbated on smaller blogs where we all get to know…..and form opinions about….and judgments on…another persons character.
When really all we are seeing is PARTS of that other persons character. And then we, in a moment of weakness or to just try to “win, “attack those parts…attack who we THINK they are. It is all too easy to fall into judgment, and then to pigeon hole the ‘opposing’ poster into the very narrow parameters of that judgment. Then the ‘opposition’ is forced to react to our judgment and perception….usually with their own judgment and perception about us.
Voila….flame war.
However, it has been my experience that humans are VERY bad at not judging each other no matter how small the evidence is. I know I do! Even though I try not to. And then I end up not talking to another person….but to the judgments I have formed about that person in the ‘heat of battle.’ It is tough not to do, but if it was easy, ANYONE could do it! This approach is not a cure all, but If we can absorb this and try to put it into practice it will help.
49 comments
Skip to comment form
Author
Til I got to know the people I was flaming!
safe uneventful journey dear buhdy!
& yeah, i think you are correct sir!
that there are some people I enjoy flaming.. 😉
Fortunately, they aren’t seen at DD very often…
Troglodyte seems to have emerged from the mists of time untouched by human evolution. Devoid of a single progressive idea and lacking the slightest awareness of social and cultural advances, Troglodyte has developed an incoherent political philosophy that he characterizes as “conservative” or “libertarian”, but which could be more accurately described as “bigoted narcissism”. His aggressive posturing often frightens off weaker, more timid Warriors. In pitched battle, however, Troglodyte easily loses control and his attack quickly degenerates into a rant. Just for the fun of it, Weenie, Issues. Pinko and Evil Clown will sometimes deliberately goad him into a towering rage.
Author
a few more comments and the FP will be healed!
…easy, and productive move. Don’t forget to take all your ponies and tigers with you. Talk to you soon!
and yeah, I love that video. Its not the first time I’ve seen something wise come from Jay Smooth. Perhaps another youngun to keep an eye on.
will there be more iglesia?
is your writing (as mine is) a winter diversion?
Most folks, trust factor up and guards down, will let others see more and more of themselves over time.
We’re all like infinitely faceted crystals or beautifully, exquisitely cut diamonds (including some rough spots). We each show the other a tiny face/facet of ourselves that often doesn’t reflect the whole. Labels and judgments diminish us to the point of cartoons. To say I’m a “gun-nut” might be true as far as it goes, but it ignores/hides the vast majority of who/what I am.
Yeah, I’m a gun-nut, Robyn is a tranny and the moon, Mt. Everest, Gibraltar and the Hope Diamond are all rocks. Too often descriptions aren’t descriptive; doubly so with labels and judgments.
The “enemy” isn’t here.
is putting you out to pasture already?
Hope it has lots of grass….
We can be polite and respectful to each other and never have uncomfortable conversations.
We can be exclusively either combative or silent and never have uncomfortable conversations.
Or we can earn each other’s respect by our words and behavior on the blog, which is what I think goes to what the video is saying.
Agreeing and disagreeing is one thing. But there are other situations which are not as clear cut as agreeing or disagreeing. As in the video, how do you tell someone you think what they said is racist? Or out of line? Or hurtful in some way?
It’s hard to tell someone you dislike, or judge in the way buhdy is talking about in his essay … can’t see past the negative judgment to engage the person.
But it’s equally hard to tell someone you really like and judge in a positive way … can’t see past the positive judgment to the person’s words and behavior to engage the person.
I liked that video. I think it’s difficult, though, in any blog, to have a lot of people rise to that level of true discourse, especially on a community blog.
Have a safe journey, buhdy, and thank you for your wise words.
* don’t insult other posters
* understand that if you start with the insults, you’re libel to be met with insults in return
* take responsibility for your own actions, words, behavior
* apologize without qualification
when people push back. people get beat up on all the time and just walk away. but when one pushes back, well all kinds of crazy things happen.
my experience is that when people say you aren’t listening, it really means “you’re not responding back in a way that tells me you agree”
freedom of speech… not really free. freedom of ideas? not so much free either.
we have people trying to save the world here. and when one disagrees, they risk mucking up the few minutes we have to make it all right…
because I was still absorbing it all, but for me, Nezua spoke powerfully to all this.