Mob wrangling
I often do things that anger people.
Yeah, what else is new, right? Everyone does. One of the things that's somewhat different, in my case, is that I often know I'm doing it. I often do it on purpose, knowing that it will anger someone. I don't do it with the purpose of angering them. I can imagine some improbable scenarios where I would want to anger someone, for their own safety or something similar, but I really don't think a situation like that has come up. Or is likely to.
I try to be aware of the emotional responses people will likely have to my actions. Sometimes, it's intrigue. Sometimes, it's anger. Sometimes, it's apathy. Sometimes, it's joy. I really do spend a lot of time, energy, and effort to be aware of the feelings of those around me. I'm nowhere near omniscient, but I think I've got a decent grasp on what happens in social interactions, at least emotionally. Contrary to popular belief.
Many people -- and they may be better off than I am -- do their best to keep people from becoming angry at them. I can certainly understand that. People being angry at me sucks. I hate it. It feels bad. I'm sure there are lots of other, machiavellian reasons to dislike it, like lost opportunities or something ... but really, the feeling of rejection is the worst of it. I usually don't think very highly of those people, though. I wouldn't want to be one of those people. If I am over-scared of people being angry with me, I become a doormat, easily pushed around, and often put into situations where I'm not really fond of any of my options. If I don't risk rejection, then I can't really be accepted, either.
There are a few things I value more than avoiding rejection. One of them, and I'm not completely convinced this is a good thing, is avoiding manipulation. If you need some control over me to accept me, well ... I'd rather you reject me. Angrily, if that's your wont. Just a thing. I could probably change it, with effort, over time, if I wanted.
I've actually been doing just that, to a degree. Used to be that whenever I sniffed an attempt to manipulate me (and everyone does it, subconsciously: using societal expectations is how we get along in the world, after all), I would dig in and refuse to be moved. Occasionally this involved being somewhat aggressively stubborn. Well, it often involved that. These days, if it's a small thing that I really don't care about, I don't bother. In other words, I don't care so much about the fact that it's manipulation, and instead care more about the difference in how much I care to do what people want me to do.
But! When that manipulation is coming from someone I interact with a fair bit, or expect to interact with in the future, suddenly the fact that it's manipulation actually becomes important again. It's that whole "slippery slope" thing, to mis-use a metaphor: It's easier, right now, to simply succumb, but succumbing now makes it more difficult to resist in the future. By succumbing now, I'm establishing a pattern, and then any deviance from that pattern is taken as a sign of ill will, and then I have to deal with that, too. I think this is related to that "implicit social contract" thing everyone is always blathering about.
Here, it's more important to me that I maintain my autonomy. So I do. Even if it angers whomever. (Well, I'll make exceptions when I think angering whomever will be directly hazardous to my general well-being. That would rather obviate the whole point now, wouldn't it? The idea of maintaining my autonomy is avoid such hazards.) The way I figure it, if someone will reject me for not cowtowing to their implicit wishes, I'd much rather they do it sooner than later. I rationalize it to myself by thinking that these people would reject me, eventually, in any case ... so I'm just kind of accelerating things. Yeah, I know that's often wrong.
It still sucks.
I have a reputation for being stubborn. And for not listening. And for discounting what other people say. Oddly, I also have a reputation for listening very well, and giving weight to what other people say, and for being very malleable. They're all true. The negative ones are more prevalent, of course, being negative and all. If it's something I've heard dozens of times before, I'm not really gonna bother re-thinking about it unless something drastic has changed, or a lot of time has passed and I think it's wise to revisit old conundrums. I'm definitely going to stick to my guns until someone gives me some better guns. Still, when someone actually does say something I haven't considered, I stop and think about it. Or I go home and think about it, because I'm too cowardly to back down and examine it when it's presented. When I'm given an insight I haven't thought of before, I'll incorporate it. When I'm hearing things I haven't heard three dozen times already, I'll listen attentively. If you're just repeating the party line ... I'm either zoning or cutting you off.
I definitely have a reputation for arrogance. No getting around that one. Even my best friends think I'm arrogant. Hell, I think I'm arrogant. I think it largely comes from the not listening. C'est la vie.
There are certain things that trigger the loud, blaring sirens that are my manipulation alarms. The concept of moral imperative is probably the biggest. Someone tells me how I ought to act, big claxons start blasting in my head. Especially if it's one of those "just because" kind of things, and not toward any particular goal. Pretty much anything that implies that the request is coming from something other than the person talking will do it, too: Saying things like "the boss would like it", "you'll do it if you love me", "it's the right thing to do", "it's just what good people do", the like.
Also, things that make requests that are difficult to turn down, such "Would you mind?" Minding is a much higher barrier than saying you'd rather not: It's extremely impolite to mind something, and it's expected (hah!) that you do what you've just claimed you don't mind doing. Be wary of those who ask you if you mind, but don't ask you to actually do anything directly. I'm not saying to be wary of anyone who asks if you'd mind something -- I will often ask if someone would mind, as a query to find out if they actually mind or not. If it's apparent they mind, even if they say they don't, I'll tell them not to bother. If it's apparent they don't mind, I'll ask them to do it. Be wary of people who consistently use it as their way of "requesting things without requesting things", though.
If you say I ought to finish my homework so I get a better grade, that's explicitly stating what you think that particular "ought" is likely to accomplish. If you say I should tell the truth because people don't trust liars, that's once again saying what that particular "ought" is likely to accomplish. If I care about people trusting me ... yeah, kinda obvious. If you tell me I should tell the truth, and when I ask why you say something along the lines of "you just should" ... yeah, not gonna fly with me so well.
To me, most of these things roughly translate to, "I want you to do this thing, but I'm too lame to actually take accountability for that desire." My opinion of you drops, my respect for you drops, my attachment to you drops, and my trust for you drops. Doesn't mean I don't still like you; I just like you less.
As such, I treat such things like they were desires of the person in front of me. If I wouldn't do it were it a request of the person standing in front of me, I won't do it. Actually, I'll often ask if that's what they want me to do. If they say no, I'll go on my merry way, leaving them frustrated that they can't get me to do what they want without taking accountability for the desire. If they say yes, I'll usually do it, leaving them frustrated that they actually had to admit they wanted it, instead of putting all the accountability elsewhere.
This is when people get angry. Either way. I am fully, completely aware of this. Usually. Makes sense, doesn't it? People who feel the desire to avoid personal accountability are the ones who would get angry about actually needing to take personal accountability for things, whether they did it or not. Sometimes people just get confused by the bit where I act differently than they expect, and anger is a great, tried-and-true cover for confusion. But see, that's okay. I'd rather deal with the anger and the rejection than with being a doormat. This way, even if you don't like me, at least I like me, and that's really important to me. It's more important than you liking me.
I'm not trying to change how you act -- you can continue to be obtuse about it, and you'll continue to get stonewalled, and if that's the way you like it, that's fine by me. I won't have much interest in you for very long, and it will likely be mutual.
I could get into a whole bunch of reasons I think this is a reasonable and positive approach. First off, by giving you what you want only when you're straight with me, I'm setting up a precedence where it (hopefully) becomes obvious to you that the best way to get what you want from me is to be straight about it. The people who refuse to be straight with me are not people I'd typically want around. The people who'd get angry with me for not allowing them to push me around without blame are not the people I'd particularly want to have pushing me around (believe it or not, there are actually people I'd trust to push me around). There's even the arrogant bit about how if you learn how to deal with me, you'll be more able to play well with others in general -- which I truly believe, arrogant as it is.
Now, before you balk (I'm too late, aren't I?) and say, "but that really is what you should do, sometimes -- it has nothing to do with being straight about things!" -- try to figure out why you'd say it, and to me in particular. Why do you care? Why bother wasting your breath? It's because you want something, of course. Sure, it might be true that it's really what I should do. Why do you care? Because you want me to do it, of course. If you can't be straight with me about that part of it, well, we have issues. Even if all you want is for me to be a good person, you good samaritan you, then that's once again a request you have of me: you want me to be a good person. Just admit it and move on.
Sometimes, you might just want to give me information, in case I wasn't aware of it, just to be nice, because you like being nice. In that case, the only thing you want from me (always something) is for me to listen to it. If I already know it, then you've achieved what you set out to do. If I don't already know it, that's cool. That's awesome, in fact. I'll thank you for the information, file it away for future reference, and go on with my life. If I didn't know the boss wanted so-and-so done by Thursday instead of Friday, I'll probably be really glad you told me. If you really are just looking out for me, then you might prefer I do what you suggest, because you want the best for me and all, but you likely wouldn't get angry if I didn't use your information. You'd probably think I was stupid and hopeless, instead. If you actually get angry about it, you wanted something more.
So, yeah. I do things that make people angry. It doesn't make everyone angry, just those who aren't being straight with me. Sadly, this is often because they're not being straight with themselves. Either way, it's people I'm not terribly inclined to get close to, and although it sucks to have people be angry at me, I think the precedent is worth it.
I am so gonna get lynched someday.
Yeah, what else is new, right? Everyone does. One of the things that's somewhat different, in my case, is that I often know I'm doing it. I often do it on purpose, knowing that it will anger someone. I don't do it with the purpose of angering them. I can imagine some improbable scenarios where I would want to anger someone, for their own safety or something similar, but I really don't think a situation like that has come up. Or is likely to.
I try to be aware of the emotional responses people will likely have to my actions. Sometimes, it's intrigue. Sometimes, it's anger. Sometimes, it's apathy. Sometimes, it's joy. I really do spend a lot of time, energy, and effort to be aware of the feelings of those around me. I'm nowhere near omniscient, but I think I've got a decent grasp on what happens in social interactions, at least emotionally. Contrary to popular belief.
Many people -- and they may be better off than I am -- do their best to keep people from becoming angry at them. I can certainly understand that. People being angry at me sucks. I hate it. It feels bad. I'm sure there are lots of other, machiavellian reasons to dislike it, like lost opportunities or something ... but really, the feeling of rejection is the worst of it. I usually don't think very highly of those people, though. I wouldn't want to be one of those people. If I am over-scared of people being angry with me, I become a doormat, easily pushed around, and often put into situations where I'm not really fond of any of my options. If I don't risk rejection, then I can't really be accepted, either.
There are a few things I value more than avoiding rejection. One of them, and I'm not completely convinced this is a good thing, is avoiding manipulation. If you need some control over me to accept me, well ... I'd rather you reject me. Angrily, if that's your wont. Just a thing. I could probably change it, with effort, over time, if I wanted.
I've actually been doing just that, to a degree. Used to be that whenever I sniffed an attempt to manipulate me (and everyone does it, subconsciously: using societal expectations is how we get along in the world, after all), I would dig in and refuse to be moved. Occasionally this involved being somewhat aggressively stubborn. Well, it often involved that. These days, if it's a small thing that I really don't care about, I don't bother. In other words, I don't care so much about the fact that it's manipulation, and instead care more about the difference in how much I care to do what people want me to do.
But! When that manipulation is coming from someone I interact with a fair bit, or expect to interact with in the future, suddenly the fact that it's manipulation actually becomes important again. It's that whole "slippery slope" thing, to mis-use a metaphor: It's easier, right now, to simply succumb, but succumbing now makes it more difficult to resist in the future. By succumbing now, I'm establishing a pattern, and then any deviance from that pattern is taken as a sign of ill will, and then I have to deal with that, too. I think this is related to that "implicit social contract" thing everyone is always blathering about.
Here, it's more important to me that I maintain my autonomy. So I do. Even if it angers whomever. (Well, I'll make exceptions when I think angering whomever will be directly hazardous to my general well-being. That would rather obviate the whole point now, wouldn't it? The idea of maintaining my autonomy is avoid such hazards.) The way I figure it, if someone will reject me for not cowtowing to their implicit wishes, I'd much rather they do it sooner than later. I rationalize it to myself by thinking that these people would reject me, eventually, in any case ... so I'm just kind of accelerating things. Yeah, I know that's often wrong.
It still sucks.
I have a reputation for being stubborn. And for not listening. And for discounting what other people say. Oddly, I also have a reputation for listening very well, and giving weight to what other people say, and for being very malleable. They're all true. The negative ones are more prevalent, of course, being negative and all. If it's something I've heard dozens of times before, I'm not really gonna bother re-thinking about it unless something drastic has changed, or a lot of time has passed and I think it's wise to revisit old conundrums. I'm definitely going to stick to my guns until someone gives me some better guns. Still, when someone actually does say something I haven't considered, I stop and think about it. Or I go home and think about it, because I'm too cowardly to back down and examine it when it's presented. When I'm given an insight I haven't thought of before, I'll incorporate it. When I'm hearing things I haven't heard three dozen times already, I'll listen attentively. If you're just repeating the party line ... I'm either zoning or cutting you off.
I definitely have a reputation for arrogance. No getting around that one. Even my best friends think I'm arrogant. Hell, I think I'm arrogant. I think it largely comes from the not listening. C'est la vie.
There are certain things that trigger the loud, blaring sirens that are my manipulation alarms. The concept of moral imperative is probably the biggest. Someone tells me how I ought to act, big claxons start blasting in my head. Especially if it's one of those "just because" kind of things, and not toward any particular goal. Pretty much anything that implies that the request is coming from something other than the person talking will do it, too: Saying things like "the boss would like it", "you'll do it if you love me", "it's the right thing to do", "it's just what good people do", the like.
Also, things that make requests that are difficult to turn down, such "Would you mind?" Minding is a much higher barrier than saying you'd rather not: It's extremely impolite to mind something, and it's expected (hah!) that you do what you've just claimed you don't mind doing. Be wary of those who ask you if you mind, but don't ask you to actually do anything directly. I'm not saying to be wary of anyone who asks if you'd mind something -- I will often ask if someone would mind, as a query to find out if they actually mind or not. If it's apparent they mind, even if they say they don't, I'll tell them not to bother. If it's apparent they don't mind, I'll ask them to do it. Be wary of people who consistently use it as their way of "requesting things without requesting things", though.
If you say I ought to finish my homework so I get a better grade, that's explicitly stating what you think that particular "ought" is likely to accomplish. If you say I should tell the truth because people don't trust liars, that's once again saying what that particular "ought" is likely to accomplish. If I care about people trusting me ... yeah, kinda obvious. If you tell me I should tell the truth, and when I ask why you say something along the lines of "you just should" ... yeah, not gonna fly with me so well.
To me, most of these things roughly translate to, "I want you to do this thing, but I'm too lame to actually take accountability for that desire." My opinion of you drops, my respect for you drops, my attachment to you drops, and my trust for you drops. Doesn't mean I don't still like you; I just like you less.
As such, I treat such things like they were desires of the person in front of me. If I wouldn't do it were it a request of the person standing in front of me, I won't do it. Actually, I'll often ask if that's what they want me to do. If they say no, I'll go on my merry way, leaving them frustrated that they can't get me to do what they want without taking accountability for the desire. If they say yes, I'll usually do it, leaving them frustrated that they actually had to admit they wanted it, instead of putting all the accountability elsewhere.
This is when people get angry. Either way. I am fully, completely aware of this. Usually. Makes sense, doesn't it? People who feel the desire to avoid personal accountability are the ones who would get angry about actually needing to take personal accountability for things, whether they did it or not. Sometimes people just get confused by the bit where I act differently than they expect, and anger is a great, tried-and-true cover for confusion. But see, that's okay. I'd rather deal with the anger and the rejection than with being a doormat. This way, even if you don't like me, at least I like me, and that's really important to me. It's more important than you liking me.
I'm not trying to change how you act -- you can continue to be obtuse about it, and you'll continue to get stonewalled, and if that's the way you like it, that's fine by me. I won't have much interest in you for very long, and it will likely be mutual.
I could get into a whole bunch of reasons I think this is a reasonable and positive approach. First off, by giving you what you want only when you're straight with me, I'm setting up a precedence where it (hopefully) becomes obvious to you that the best way to get what you want from me is to be straight about it. The people who refuse to be straight with me are not people I'd typically want around. The people who'd get angry with me for not allowing them to push me around without blame are not the people I'd particularly want to have pushing me around (believe it or not, there are actually people I'd trust to push me around). There's even the arrogant bit about how if you learn how to deal with me, you'll be more able to play well with others in general -- which I truly believe, arrogant as it is.
Now, before you balk (I'm too late, aren't I?) and say, "but that really is what you should do, sometimes -- it has nothing to do with being straight about things!" -- try to figure out why you'd say it, and to me in particular. Why do you care? Why bother wasting your breath? It's because you want something, of course. Sure, it might be true that it's really what I should do. Why do you care? Because you want me to do it, of course. If you can't be straight with me about that part of it, well, we have issues. Even if all you want is for me to be a good person, you good samaritan you, then that's once again a request you have of me: you want me to be a good person. Just admit it and move on.
Sometimes, you might just want to give me information, in case I wasn't aware of it, just to be nice, because you like being nice. In that case, the only thing you want from me (always something) is for me to listen to it. If I already know it, then you've achieved what you set out to do. If I don't already know it, that's cool. That's awesome, in fact. I'll thank you for the information, file it away for future reference, and go on with my life. If I didn't know the boss wanted so-and-so done by Thursday instead of Friday, I'll probably be really glad you told me. If you really are just looking out for me, then you might prefer I do what you suggest, because you want the best for me and all, but you likely wouldn't get angry if I didn't use your information. You'd probably think I was stupid and hopeless, instead. If you actually get angry about it, you wanted something more.
So, yeah. I do things that make people angry. It doesn't make everyone angry, just those who aren't being straight with me. Sadly, this is often because they're not being straight with themselves. Either way, it's people I'm not terribly inclined to get close to, and although it sucks to have people be angry at me, I think the precedent is worth it.
I am so gonna get lynched someday.