7 Worst Things About Being Male

[The Blaatschapen]

What a vapid defelction.



Except for the multiple people here who have said so, I suppose?



Right, ok, got it, so you'd only change if people tell you it bothers them, except not THESE people, they're not REALLY people, you see, because, well, they're just NOT, damn it. How very convenient.

I'll reiterrate, what a remarkably self centered way to live.

If I understand correctly, his argument is that we don't count because we can't hear that he says it in a cute accent. And, I mean, I think that's a pretty silly argument, but at least he has some reason why the opinions of people on the internet don't count?

I gotta say, though - I'm totally a sucker for a cute accent, but I really, really don't think it makes as much of a difference as TED seems to think, because my objection to "smile for me" has never been "the complete stranger isn't telling me to perform for him attractively enough."

You should hear me talk. You'd drool

[Nailed to the Perch]

If I understand correctly, his argument is that we don't count because we can't hear that he says it in a cute accent. And, I mean, I think that's a pretty silly argument, but at least he has some reason why the opinions of people on the internet don't count?

I gotta say, though - I'm totally a sucker for a cute accent, but I really, really don't think it makes as much of a difference as TED seems to think, because my objection to "smile for me" has never been "the complete stranger isn't telling me to perform for him attractively enough."

So you're saying I should develop an irish accent...ok...

QUICK, THEY'RE AFTER ME LUCKY CHARMS!

...I'm cool with it.

[Nailed to the Perch]

If I understand correctly, his argument is that we don't count because we can't hear that he says it in a cute accent. And, I mean, I think that's a pretty silly argument, but at least he has some reason why the opinions of people on the internet don't count?

I gotta say, though - I'm totally a sucker for a cute accent, but I really, really don't think it makes as much of a difference as TED seems to think, because my objection to "smile for me" has never been "the complete stranger isn't telling me to perform for him attractively enough."

You should hear me talk. You'd drool

Don't you just say "baaaaa"? I mean, that's cute and all, but I prefer a bit more in the way of conversation.

[EnragedMaldivians]

Yes but it's not one of those sentiments that's rare like many pet irks are. I don't expect people to accommodate themselves to the rather bizarre dislike I have for puns for instance (yes, I'm that odd; I am annoyed by puns) - but the idea that someone who looks down should not just be randomly walked up to and told to smile, is not that uncommon (I mean just for an international perspective, I'm from the Maldives, so it's not like this being found annoying behaviour is idiosyncratic to where Bottle, NTP or CTOAN are from). Feigning polite appreciation is also not uncommon. You can't tell their sincerity. Again, strangers, mate, strangers.

And I go up to strangers and strike up a conversation. If they don't seem interested, or they tell me they aren't interested, then I'll fuck off. I'm at a pub, I'm not at someone's house, I'm not going door-to-door like some vacuum salesman. This is a place where there is music, and dancing, and people meeting people. This is a place where people GO to meet people. I don't walk up to people in banks, or airports, or thriftmarkets, or libraries and strike up conversations.

We're talking about people who look like they're down and you going up to them and telling them to smile. That is very often annoying to people.

I'm not objecting to the fact that you make conversations with strangers in bars. Again, I'm talking about something more specific than that.

[The Blaatschapen]

Because, believe it or not, people generally don't know that they're making others uncomfortable unless being told so (whether by body language or normal language).

I absolutely and steadfastly refuse to believe that people are INCAPABLE of knowing that their conduct is likely to cause discomfort in people. In fact, definitely, so intrinsic to our social functions is that skill, that the inability to do that, to understand basic social conditions, is considered a developmental disorder.

Yes, "people" damned well do know whether their conduct is going to make people uncomfortable or not, that's basic social conditioning.

While quite a big group of conduct is indeed highly likely to cause discomfort, some of it is in the gray area. Here it will really depend on the people and the general situation how certain conduct will come across.

Take the smile example, TED has good experiences with it, some others don't. Typical grey area, if you ask me. Nothing to get particularly worried about *shrugs*

[The Emerald Dawn]

And I go up to strangers and strike up a conversation. If they don't seem interested, or they tell me they aren't interested, then I'll fuck off. I'm at a pub, I'm not at someone's house, I'm not going door-to-door like some vacuum salesman. This is a place where there is music, and dancing, and people meeting people. This is a place where people GO to meet people. I don't walk up to people in banks, or airports, or thriftmarkets, or libraries and strike up conversations.

We're talking about people who look like they're down and you going up to them and telling them to smile. That is very often annoying to people.

I'm not objecting to the fact that you make conversations with strangers in bars. Again, I'm talking about something more specific than that.

I go up to people who look like they're not having a good time, or who look like they're having a rough go of it, and I'll say anything from, "Hey, mate. Give us a smile and I'll buy us a round. We'll drink to the now." to "Excuse me, miss. Seems you're not having the time of your life. Let me buy a round, and we'll see if we can get a grin."

[The Blaatschapen]

You should hear me talk. You'd drool

Don't you just say "baaaaa"? I mean, that's cute and all, but I prefer a bit more in the way of conversation.

I make puns too. If that's your cup of tea.

[Neo Art]

I think that understanding basic social cues, and understanding where along the line we fall into the "yeah, this is almost CERTAINLY going to bother someone, I shouldn't do it" and "there's NO way this could reasonably bother anyone, so I'm not going to not do it on the amazingly small chance", and navigating that particular sliding scale, falls into that broad catagory of "being a fucking adult".

It's that kinda shit that we learn between ages...say...2 and 20. That's kinda what social conditioning is all ABOUT. Learning exactly where your conduct falls from "nobody should ever do this in polite company" to "generally universally socially acceptable" is part of learning how to be an adult person in functional society.

And we miss, of course, we aren't all perfect with it. Some are better than others. I am, despite what some might think here, a fucking pro at it (literally, I'm a lawyer, this kinda shit is what I do). Others are very awkward about it. Some even have disorders that, as their principle symptom, make it extremely difficult if not impossible to do that.

I don't necessarily fault anyone for FAILING at that. Sometimes they're just wrong, and that's not anybody's fault. Where I do blame them, however, is, once confronted with it, choosing to, instead of dealing like it, like, again, an adult, to instead plug their ears and scream "LALALALALAIMNOTLISTENINGIMNOTLISTENING!"

Much better phrased.

Here's the thing. Adults do not deal in absolutes. You know who does? Children. Children deal in absolutes. Adults are better than that. We're more capable than that. We're more understanding of nuances.

So when I say "that behavior is likely to be seen as uncomfortable, you might want to consider not doing it" the adult response is to consider my response, like an adult. Doesn't mean you have to AGREE. It doesn't mean you have to ACCEPT it. You can evaluate it, with all the nuance, sophistication, and intelligence that adults are suppost to have, and come to a conclusion with it.

What you SHOULDN'T do is respond with "oh, so I guess I just need to crawl away and DIE huh, because ANTYHING can insult SOMEONE, so I shouldn't do ANYTHING". Because that's not how adults speak to adults. That's now how we interact.

No, you're right, I didn't explain that of course I"m discussing a specific context and my point isn't intended to imply that this is true unversally for all human interaction, and ther eis of course social conditions that go into this, and those are all factors that should weigh into human interaction. I shouldn't have to do this, because as an adult, talking to an adult, I operate under the assumption that the person I'm talking to knows this already.

And if you (the general "you") choose to attack my position not because you believe it WRONG, but because I didn't put enough disclaimers to clearly indicate that I wasn't speaking in black and white hard lined absolutes, and expected the person on the other end of the conversation to be able to read my words in the context of being an adult in polite society...you're right, I didn't. Because I expected the person on the other end of the conversation to be able to read my words in the context of being an adult in a polite society.

And if you (again, general "you") are bothered by this, and would prefer I don't treat you like, well, you know, and adult, and would prefer I add all these little disclamers, lest you get confused and interpret my statements in full absolutes, like we're fucking children, then alright, I suppose I can oblidge.

But I contend that says a whole lot more about you than it does about me.

[EnragedMaldivians]

I absolutely and steadfastly refuse to believe that people are INCAPABLE of knowing that their conduct is likely to cause discomfort in people. In fact, definitely, so intrinsic to our social functions is that skill, that the inability to do that, to understand basic social conditions, is considered a developmental disorder.

Yes, "people" damned well do know whether their conduct is going to make people uncomfortable or not, that's basic social conditioning.

While quite a big group of conduct is indeed highly likely to cause discomfort, some of it is in the gray area. Here it will really depend on the people and the general situation how certain conduct will come across.

Take the smile example, TED has good experiences with it, some others don't. Typical grey area, if you ask me. Nothing to get particularly worried about *shrugs*

Umm we realise he's not going around beating up kittens and going to KKK rallies.

We're commenting on a behaviour that is frequently enough interpreted as annoying and intrusive and ED's insistence that he will persist in it unless told otherwise.

[Northern Dominus]

Because, believe it or not, people generally don't know that they're making others uncomfortable unless being told so (whether by body language or normal language).

I absolutely and steadfastly refuse to believe that people are INCAPABLE of knowing that their conduct is likely to cause discomfort in people. In fact, definitely, so intrinsic to our social functions is that skill, that the inability to do that, to understand basic social conditions, is considered a developmental disorder.

Yes, "people" damned well do know whether their conduct is going to make people uncomfortable or not, that's basic social conditioning.

And by that token there are also "people" who have hair-triggers and look for things to be offended by and rage against. The fault doesn't always lie in the initiator, and to insinuate to that effect is disingenuous.

[Ostroeuropa]

Much better phrased.

Here's the thing. Adults do not deal in absolutes. You know who does? Children. Children deal in absolutes. Adults are better than that. We're more capable than that. We're more understanding of nuances.

So when I say "that behavior is likely to be seen as uncomfortable, you might want to consider not doing it" the adult response is to consider my response, like an adult. Doesn't mean you have to AGREE. It doesn't mean you have to ACCEPT it. You can evaluate it, with all the nuance, sophistication, and intelligence that adults are suppost to have, and come to a conclusion with it.

What you SHOULDN'T do is respond with "oh, so I guess I just need to crawl away and DIE huh, because ANTYHING can insult SOMEONE, so I shouldn't do ANYTHING". Because that's not how adults speak to adults. That's now how we interact.

No, you're right, I didn't explain that of course I"m discussing a specific context and my point isn't intended to imply that this is true unversally for all human interaction, and ther eis of course social conditions that go into this, and those are all factors that should weigh into human interaction. I shouldn't have to do this, because as an adult, talking to an adult, I operate under the assumption that the person I'm talking to knows this already.

And if you (the general "you") choose to attack my position not because you believe it WRONG, but because I didn't put enough disclaimers to clearly indicate that I wasn't speaking in black and white hard lined absolutes, and expected the person on the other end of the conversation to be able to read my words in the context of being an adult in polite society...you're right, I didn't. Because I expected the person on the other end of the conversation to be able to read my words in the context of being an adult in a polite society.

And if you (again, general "you") are bothered by this, and would prefer I don't treat you like, well, you know, and adult, and would prefer I add all these little disclamers, lest you get confused and interpret my statements in full absolutes, like we're fucking children, then alright, I suppose I can oblidge.

But I contend that says a whole lot more about you than it does about me.

My point wasn't that you phrased it in a way that wasn't explicit, but that you phrased it in a way that actually prohibited what you're talking about. You didn't leave any room for people to add those bits on. (In one interperatation.)
And given that this argument has continued anyway from numerous people taking what you said and objecting, maybe you'd do well to consider that it really was you who fucked up the phrasing and not me for pointing out you fucked up, or anyone else for misinterperating you.

[The Emerald Dawn]

I absolutely and steadfastly refuse to believe that people are INCAPABLE of knowing that their conduct is likely to cause discomfort in people. In fact, definitely, so intrinsic to our social functions is that skill, that the inability to do that, to understand basic social conditions, is considered a developmental disorder.

Yes, "people" damned well do know whether their conduct is going to make people uncomfortable or not, that's basic social conditioning.

While quite a big group of conduct is indeed highly likely to cause discomfort, some of it is in the gray area. Here it will really depend on the people and the general situation how certain conduct will come across.

Take the smile example, TED has good experiences with it, some others don't. Typical grey area, if you ask me. Nothing to get particularly worried about *shrugs*

It got heated when FSC decided that I was a bad person for doing it. It escalated from there. It is pretty typical of NSG.

[The Emerald Dawn]

While quite a big group of conduct is indeed highly likely to cause discomfort, some of it is in the gray area. Here it will really depend on the people and the general situation how certain conduct will come across.

Take the smile example, TED has good experiences with it, some others don't. Typical grey area, if you ask me. Nothing to get particularly worried about *shrugs*

Umm we realise he's not going around beating up kittens and going to KKK rallies.

We're commenting on a behaviour that is frequently enough interpreted as annoying and intrusive and ED's insistence that he will persist in it unless told otherwise.

*puts down the kitten* Uh, nothing to see here. Cringer's fine.

[EnragedMaldivians]

We're talking about people who look like they're down and you going up to them and telling them to smile. That is very often annoying to people.

I'm not objecting to the fact that you make conversations with strangers in bars. Again, I'm talking about something more specific than that.

I go up to people who look like they're not having a good time, or who look like they're having a rough go of it, and I'll say anything from, "Hey, mate. Give us a smile and I'll buy us a round. We'll drink to the now." to "Excuse me, miss. Seems you're not having the time of your life. Let me buy a round, and we'll see if we can get a grin."

I would find that annoying as would a lot of other people. In that instance, whether I refused or accepted, I would smile and feign appreciation. There is no way you could tell if I was being sincere or not. That's the point you seem to be missing.

Again. There are other people who go to bars to socialise. Consider striking up a conversation with them.

[The Emerald Dawn]

I go up to people who look like they're not having a good time, or who look like they're having a rough go of it, and I'll say anything from, "Hey, mate. Give us a smile and I'll buy us a round. We'll drink to the now." to "Excuse me, miss. Seems you're not having the time of your life. Let me buy a round, and we'll see if we can get a grin."

I would find that annoying as would a lot of other people. In that instance, whether I refused or accepted, I would smile and feign appreciation. There is no way you could tell if I was being sincere or not. That's the point you seem to be missing.

Again. There are other people who go to bars to socialise. Consider striking up a conversation with them.

I do. I'm not just trawling bars for people who look dejected. I look for people who seem interesting.

[EnragedMaldivians]

I absolutely and steadfastly refuse to believe that people are INCAPABLE of knowing that their conduct is likely to cause discomfort in people. In fact, definitely, so intrinsic to our social functions is that skill, that the inability to do that, to understand basic social conditions, is considered a developmental disorder.

Yes, "people" damned well do know whether their conduct is going to make people uncomfortable or not, that's basic social conditioning.

And by that token there are also "people" who have hair-triggers and look for things to be offended by and rage against. The fault doesn't always lie in the initiator, and to insinuate to that effect is disingenuous.

You understand the difference between rare pet peeves and things that get on a lot of people's nerves frequently, right?

[The Blaatschapen]

While quite a big group of conduct is indeed highly likely to cause discomfort, some of it is in the gray area. Here it will really depend on the people and the general situation how certain conduct will come across.

Take the smile example, TED has good experiences with it, some others don't. Typical grey area, if you ask me. Nothing to get particularly worried about *shrugs*

Umm we realise he's not going around beating up kittens and going to KKK rallies.

We're commenting on a behaviour that is frequently enough interpreted as annoying and intrusive and ED's insistence that he will persist in it unless told otherwise.

Which I think is quite proper behaviour on his part. So far, it seems to have worked for him throughout the years, and if he claims that he'll stop if it makes someone uncomfortable, well, what more can you ask?

It might also be a culturally or local thing. I know Spanish and Finnish people and the way they communicate is quite.... different from each other. Nothing to worry about I guess, as long as you're willing to accept that some people will dislike your behaviour and that you're willing to adapt if it is worth it.

*shrugs*

[Northern Dominus]

And by that token there are also "people" who have hair-triggers and look for things to be offended by and rage against. The fault doesn't always lie in the initiator, and to insinuate to that effect is disingenuous.

You understand the difference between rare pet peeves and things that get on a lot of people's nerves frequently, right?

Yes...and as ED mentioned if someone doesn't appreciate it and says as much, off he goes. Therefore there's no reason to get bent out of shape over one instance, and suggesting that what he does is horrible in the first place is again, disingenuous.

[Neo Art]

And given that this argument has continued anyway from numerous people taking what you said and objecting, maybe you'd do well to consider that it really was you who fucked up the phrasing and not me for pointing out you fucked up.

I mean, yeah, as I said, I'll fully admit that perhaps I overestimated the crowd. But again, I'll still contend that anyone who took what I said to mean that, that this fact says a lot more about them than it does about me.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Umm we realise he's not going around beating up kittens and going to KKK rallies.

We're commenting on a behaviour that is frequently enough interpreted as annoying and intrusive and ED's insistence that he will persist in it unless told otherwise.

Which I think is quite proper behaviour on his part. So far, it seems to have worked for him throughout the years, and if he claims that he'll stop if it makes someone uncomfortable, well, what more can you ask?

It might also be a culturally or local thing. I know Spanish and Finnish people and the way they communicate is quite.... different from each other. Nothing to worry about I guess, as long as you're willing to accept that some people will dislike your behaviour and that you're willing to adapt if it is worth it.

*shrugs*

The problem seems to be that I'm an otherwise "real mensch", but I do this one thing that works for me, but annoys the majority of people posting here.

I honestly have that effect on people. Even people who like me for some reason seem to hate me at times. *shrug*

[Neo Art]

You understand the difference between rare pet peeves and things that get on a lot of people's nerves frequently, right?

Yes...and as ED mentioned if someone doesn't appreciate it and says as much, off he goes. Therefore there's no reason to get bent out of shape over one instance, and suggesting that what he does is horrible in the first place is again, disingenuous.

Horrible? No, but again, I don't think people have suggested it's HORRIBLE, so continuing to claim this is, again, a childish insistance on absolutes. I don't think it's HORRIBLE.

I think it's likely to be perceived as fucking annoying, and probably bothered more people than he's aware of. But frankly, I'm less bothered by the fact that "man does something that occassionally annoys people he didn't intend to annoy". God knows I do it enough.

What I see is a bit more concerning is, when faced with that fact, the chosen response was "well I guess I should just go away in DIE huh?" I mean, sure, I've done that at times, I pulled the whole "well maybe I'll DIE and YOU'LL BE SORRY!"

if memory serves I was, at the time, 6.

[Ethel mermania]

OH WOE IS YOU, THE PERPETUALLY OPPRESSED GOOD GUY. I bet you hate the friendzone too? Have a penchant for fedoras too perhaps?

I have absolutely no freaking idea what you're implying.

that you look good in a hat.

though i think he thinks your an evil male only out for one evil thing.

i am glad i had to work today, this thread is much more amusing to read.

[Northern Dominus]

Yes...and as ED mentioned if someone doesn't appreciate it and says as much, off he goes. Therefore there's no reason to get bent out of shape over one instance, and suggesting that what he does is horrible in the first place is again, disingenuous.

Horrible? No, but again, I don't think people have suggested it's HORRIBLE, so continuing to claim this is, again, a childish insistance on absolutes. I don't think it's HORRIBLE.

I think it's likely to be perceived as fucking annoying, and probably bothered more people than he's aware of.

According to whom? You? Are you annoyed by the notion? Have you done the research in his locality.

How can you assert with any sort of confidence that his greeting is in fact annoying, beyond your personal feelings in the matter?

[The Blaatschapen]

Which I think is quite proper behaviour on his part. So far, it seems to have worked for him throughout the years, and if he claims that he'll stop if it makes someone uncomfortable, well, what more can you ask?

It might also be a culturally or local thing. I know Spanish and Finnish people and the way they communicate is quite.... different from each other. Nothing to worry about I guess, as long as you're willing to accept that some people will dislike your behaviour and that you're willing to adapt if it is worth it.

*shrugs*

The problem seems to be that I'm an otherwise "real mensch", but I do this one thing that works for me, but annoys the majority of people posting here.

I honestly have that effect on people. Even people who like me for some reason seem to hate me at times. *shrug*

Noone can always like somebody else 100%. In fact, I'd find such a thing creepy

You can love unconditionally though

[EnragedMaldivians]

You understand the difference between rare pet peeves and things that get on a lot of people's nerves frequently, right?

Yes...and as ED mentioned if someone doesn't appreciate it and says as much, off he goes. Therefore there's no reason to get bent out of shape over one instance, and suggesting that what he does is horrible in the first place is again, disingenuous.

Except that people do actually feign appreciation for that sort of thing lest they seem rude. That is, for instance, what I would do.

Really, I am at most suggesting that that kind of behaviour is annoying. I don't think he's perpetuating a horrible injustice in the world or he's out there smashing babies against walls for fun. Again, I like Emerald Dawn. But annoying behaviour it remains, and I don't see anything wrong with pointing it out.