Can't resist the zing...

[avevale_intelligencer]

Thinking about what causes so much angst and bad feeling on the net between people who are all basically of good heart and intention, and who when in conversation face to face manage to get along perfectly well most of the time, and I think it comes (at least in part) from the fact that when you are on your own, typing into a screen, it's much, much harder to self-censor.

How many times have we seen a post that was obviously intended to be dignified and dispassionate, and to give at least the appearance of impartiality, in which the writer simply couldn't resist indulging in one swipe at that with which s/he disagrees? I've done it. You've done it. (Jazz musicians in a groove done it...)

The smart thing to do, once you've typed it and marvelled at its incisiveness, is to take it out again, but the temptation is too strong, so instead we chop it about and turn nouns into indeterminate phrases and try to disguise the true intent. And of course, the more obscure we make the target at which we aim, the more provocative it is to the greater number of people, because everyone feels got at and nobody knows quite why. Again, guilty as charged.

And all that hostility doesn't go away, not easily, because we're on our own typing into a screen and there's nowhere to put it. So we log on to FB or DW or Twitter, find something with which we disagree and flame the tar out of that instead, generating more hostility. And then someone else, horrified at all this unpleasantness, writes a post that's intended to be dignified and dispassionate and impartial, but can't resist...and so it goes.

I'm coming to the conclusion that there's no point in pretending to be impartial when I'm not, because when I try I always sabotage myself this way. My true feelings come out. It's a Sagittarius thing. (Though, as I say, on the net everyone seems to do it.) I should just say what I mean, and if I know saying what I mean would hurt someone, say nothing at all. (Because resolving to do that always works so very well. Yeah right.)

A friend on FB told me that my problem was my false belief that other people care what I think. I'd say he's totally wrong. If nobody cared what anybody else thought, there would be no flame wars on the net, and if nobody cared what *I* thought, I wouldn't get into so many arguments. One of the chief characteristics of this ongoing global pub conversation we seem to be having is that everyone cares about what other people think, and that isn't a bug, it's a feature. It's good to care, and it's good to be honest and open, and if you are sure you're right it's good to try--by non-violent and non-oppressive means--to change people's minds, even if you know you're doomed to fail. It's good--in the end--to learn and to teach, and we can all do some of each, even if what people learn from us isn't what we think we're teaching, and vice versa.

Is there a way to avoid the angst and hostility that comes from a conflict of passions? Only by denying the passions themselves, and that's never a good idea. They always come out in the end, if only in an ill-advised zing tacked on to what was meant to be a statement of neutrality. There will be hurt. The best we can do is always to strive to speak from love, and hope that that comes through as well, and not let our passion curdle into venom if we can avoid it.

This has been another in the series of gropings towards a truth. Thank you for your patience.

Comments

[the-magician.livejournal.com]

"My true feelings come out. It's a Sagittarius thing."

Astrology is bunk :-) ... that's my true feelings ... though I can quite believe that if you are born in the UK at a particular time of the year, then whether you are out in the sunshine playing at a formative age, or inside swaddled in blankets, could have a pretty large effect.

Similarly children that are six months older than their classmates are (in general) more mature and able to pick up skills, facts and such faster than the younger children ... so there's an academic difference based on when in the year you are born ... but that's not astrology ...

:-)

[eoforyth.livejournal.com]

I find that, particularly once you get to the level of flame wars, it doesn't really matter what you as an individual thinks so long as someone else perceives that there is a thought/belief expressed that isn't what they believe/think, so they attack. In that, no, they don't care what you think, they only want to impress what they think, and see you as a platform.

I got attacked on LJ for simply offering a hug of emotional support to someone who was being flamed for offering support to another person on DA, myself having made no comment on DA. These people don't want to debate, they just want to take down anything that doesn't fit with what they want to see/hear.

On the other hand, some people see any attempt to open a dialogue, or debate certain areas of contention, as an attack on them personally, missing out on a chance to expound their ideas/beliefs, sort out misunderstandings or cues as to why their comments might trigger a knee jerk reaction in another person.

In a forum that, as illogical as it sounds in this context, is as dispassionate as the written word, the trick is often spotting the difference between an attack and an attempt at debate or weighting the balance (or even a supposedly humourous comment) and responding accordingly.

And with that, (((Zander)))

[dickgloucester.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, I hear today that Britain has become much less violent of late. Perhaps everyone's just channelling it onto the internet.