Being *rejected* can be so funny!

[Lil Honey]

So it's based in insecurity, perhaps?

 

I don't know. I was thinking more along the lines of needing attention or needing to be right - like a superiority complex. Maybe insecurity is the cause of the complex. (?) I'm not a shrink, so I won't pretend to be one.

[SmoochieFace]

I don't know. I was thinking more along the lines of needing attention or needing to be right - like a superiority complex. Maybe insecurity is the cause of the complex. (?) I'm not a shrink, so I won't pretend to be one.

 

Yeah, I mentioned superiority complexes in my *rant* earlier in this thread about the *beep* state of the world. Maybe 99% of the world is comprised of insecure neurotics. *shrugging*

 

Some people and institutions are so damn insecure that they will lie their way out of any sort of responsibility for their *issues*.

[luvtoto]

Deflating people's egos is something I mastered long ago and it amazes me to see how fragile some people are. As I have said before, the biggest egos are the easiest to pop... just like balloons. The more air (or helium) that is crammed into the balloon the more fragile it becomes and therefore easier to pop.

 

I have to add my two cents....I know you won't agree with me SF, but, it's a free country and I feel like giving my opinion.....

 

SF, I get the distinct impression that you take pleasure in getting on a person's bad side...then, when this person finally gets pissed off...your reply to them is a *pre-meditated* snicker. What a fun game for you, huh? Quite entertaining. I don't mean to be rude. That's just how I see it.

[SmoochieFace]

I have to add my two cents....I know you won't agree with me SF, but, it's a free country and I feel like giving my opinion.....

 

SF, I get the distinct impression that you take pleasure in getting on a person's bad side...then, when this person finally gets pissed off...your reply to them is a *pre-meditated* snicker. What a fun game for you, huh? Quite entertaining. I don't mean to be rude. That's just how I see it.

 

Opinions are ALWAYS welcome... I don't necessarily have to agree with all of them but they are welcome nevertheless.

 

That said... I also can say that there is a clear double standard at work here. Seems to me that MY opinions are *not welcome* and not only have they been disagreed at times (which isn't a bad thing, btw) but they have also been *ignored*. The double standard is that I welcome ALL opinions and I believe in inclusiveness but it seems that others don't hold the same high standard I hold.

 

Why is that? Are some opinions and stances too *hard to swallow*? Are they too close to the truth for comfort? Or is this a *popularity* thing - meaning if you're young, cute, witty, *likeable*, etc. your opinions carry more weight?

 

On to your second part. I seem to get onto people's *bad sides* simply by existing. I don't know why that is but it has strongly influenced my belief that I know that no-one likes me anyway so what is the point of being *nice*.

 

Wow... another tangent - but a good one! My next thread will be about why I do not approach people for anything *social* - especially women.

[Adunaphel]

SmoochieFace,

 

if you don't mind sharing the whole story, I would really like to know why the lady who rejected you had such an opinion of you in the first place.

 

I am also interested in knowing how you asked her out (I suppose that you asked her out in order to put yourself in the position to be rejecetd)... what you told her exactly.

 

Did she ever witness episodes like the one you described, where you kept calm and laughed at at someone who was making a fool of him/herself (and perhaps actually *helped* the person look like an idiot)?

 

Your story actually saddened me. Like other posters, I got the idea that you enjoy getting on someone's bad side. I really hope I am wrong.

[SmoochieFace]

SmoochieFace,

 

if you don't mind sharing the whole story, I would really like to know why the lady who rejected you had such an opinion of you in the first place.

 

I am also interested in knowing how you asked her out (I suppose that you asked her out in order to put yourself in the position to be rejecetd)... what you told her exactly.

 

Did she ever witness episodes like the one you described, where you kept calm and laughed at at someone who was making a fool of him/herself (and perhaps actually *helped* the person look like an idiot)?

 

Your story actually saddened me. Like other posters, I got the idea that you enjoy getting on someone's bad side. I really hope I am wrong.

 

This wasn't a situation in which I *asked someone out*. That is something I don't do.

 

This was a case of being rejected simply for me being who I am. Being called all sorts of names and invectives... ESPECIALLY coming from someone who hasn't spent any time conversing with me one-on-one is quite interesting. Calling someone *hateful*, *ignorant*, *ass-bastard*, etc. without all the facts is strange to say the least.

 

She has never *seen* me laugh at anyone but I freely admit to laughing at her and making light of her ridiculous actions. I simply was interested in learning why some people resort to such attacks ESPECIALLY after they have already *rejected* the person.

[blind_otter]

Mmmmmmkay. Well I actually know both sides of the story and it's really interesting to hear different people's perspectives. Surreal sometimes. But interesting.

 

Blech.

[blind_otter]

I don't know. I was thinking more along the lines of needing attention or needing to be right - like a superiority complex. Maybe insecurity is the cause of the complex. (?) I'm not a shrink, so I won't pretend to be one.

 

inferiority complex.

[SmoochieFace]

Mmmmmmkay. Well I actually know both sides of the story and it's really interesting to hear different people's perspectives. Surreal sometimes. But interesting.

 

Blech.

 

...

[lindya]

Opinions are ALWAYS welcome... I don't necessarily have to agree with all of them but they are welcome nevertheless.

 

That said... I also can say that there is a clear double standard at work here. Seems to me that MY opinions are *not welcome* and not only have they been disagreed at times (which isn't a bad thing, btw) but they have also been *ignored*.

 

A number of posters here have put you on ignore, Smoochie. That's because they perceive you as being someone who enjoys putting other people's backs up. Are they correct? Following on from that question...

 

On to your second part. I seem to get onto people's *bad sides* simply by existing. I don't know why that is but it has strongly influenced my belief that I know that no-one likes me anyway so what is the point of being *nice*.

 

To me, this says "people aren't going to like me anyway, so I might as well enjoy - or pretend to enjoy - their negative reactions.

 

It just seems that on the whole people react to you in one of two ways. Either they become frustrated and elect to ignore you, or they adopt a protective stance and encourage you in the view that you're in the right and anyone you've got into a dispute with must be "insecure" or in some way messed up.

 

I don't think that's healthy. It just encourages you to get locked into a stance of relating to the rest of the world in an "I'm okay, you're not okay" manner. You'll recognise the reference to Transactional Analysis if you followed up my advice - from a while back - to look into it.

[SmoochieFace]

A number of posters here have put you on ignore, Smoochie. That's because they perceive you as being someone who enjoys putting other people's backs up. Are they correct?

 

And to me that's a sign of weakness. I don't have anyone here on *ignore* because I think that's childish. That's one way of refusing to hear all opinions... especially those that may *hit too close to home*.

 

Are they correct? Well... THEY think they are so what difference does it make as to what I think? People are gonna think what they want to think. No-one has the ability to REALLY change another person's thinking.

 

 

To me, this says "people aren't going to like me anyway, so I might as well enjoy - or pretend to enjoy - their negative reactions.

 

True, but I wouldn't say that I *enjoy* their negative reactions, rather it's more along the lines of me being used to it so that it isn't anything earthshattering to me. Business as usual, as they say...

 

 

It just seems that on the whole people react to you in one of two ways. Either they become frustrated and elect to ignore you, or they adopt a protective stance and encourage you in the view that you're in the right and anyone you've got into a dispute with must be "insecure" or in some way messed up.

 

So why do they get frustrated? Are they frustrated because I am not seeing the world the same way as they see it? Well... if that is the case then is it just as valid for me to be *whatever* whenever people don't see things MY way?

[blind_otter]

And to me that's a sign of weakness. I don't have anyone here on *ignore* because I think that's childish. That's one way of refusing to hear all opinions... especially those that may *hit too close to home*.

 

Ya gotta be kiddin me, SF. Seriously. It's not always because people hit too close to home. Sometimes they are just irritating.

 

And some opinions aren't worth hearing. Haven't you heard the saying "Opinions are like a**h***s, everyone has one (and usually they're full of s***)."

 

It's interesting to see what you present publicly, and how you react privately in pm.

[lindya]

So why do they get frustrated? Are they frustrated because I am not seeing the world the same way as they see it? Well... if that is the case then is it just as valid for me to be *whatever* whenever people don't see things MY way?

 

Let me quote your signature.

 

I don't have an attitude problem. You have a perception problem.

 

Attribution of blame for a communication problem. The idea that someone must be in the wrong....and that it must be the other person.

 

Every conflict takes two people. Going back to my never-ending blatherings about conflict management and resolution, once a person learns to take responsibility for their part in the breakdown of communication and escalation of conflict - rather than simply placing all the blame at the other person's feet - they become more effective at managing both communication and conflict.

 

A conflict of some sort triggered off this thread. Do you know what part you played in that, and have you learned anything from it?

[Lil Honey]

it's really interesting to hear different people's perspectives.

 

There always ARE two sides to a story.

 

number of posters here have put you on ignore, Smoochie. That's because they perceive you as being someone who enjoys putting other people's backs up. Are they correct? . . .

I've always perceived the problem as being SF's TONE. But if he doesn't understand TONE, then understanding each other IS going to be difficult and touchy. (And many times, I've read how he misunderstands meanings . . . or maybe he IS right and I'm wrong. There have been times when I thought someone was joking with him and he took it differently. Then I went on to say, "I think So-and-So was joking." And So-and-So didn't confirm that they were joking. Which, in my mind means that they were being serious, which can less than beneficial.)

 

It just seems that on the whole people react to you in one of two ways. Either they become frustrated and elect to ignore you, or they adopt a protective stance and encourage you in the view that you're in the right and anyone you've got into a dispute with must be "insecure" or in some way messed up.

I suppose one would put me in category two. I don't see it as a "protective stance," rather simply trying to get along and understand. There have been plenty of times that I've attempted to show SF a different way of looking at things. Whether he does or not look at an issue from a new angle is up to him and doesn't matter to me. But I might help someone else at the same time. The thing is, I have never found reason to swear or use name-calling at him (or anyone else for that matter).

 

The "funny" part is, I've had nasty things directed to me, simply because I get along with him. Not funny ha-ha, but funny in an different, amusing sort of way. It enforces the idea that if Person X is well-liked, Person X's opinion is always right. If Person Y said that the building was on fire, no one would believe Person Y, because they don't like Person Y. Now, I'm sure some won't believe it or they will think I'm plum looney, BUT I've seen it happen.

 

For me, if I don't like a person, I might read what they post, but I won't respond. The only time I will respond to a person I don't like, is if I can set aside my dislike and say something constructive or something to lighten the mood.

[SmoochieFace]

Every conflict takes two people. Going back to my never-ending blatherings about conflict management and resolution, once a person learns to take responsibility for their part in the breakdown of communication and escalation of conflict - rather than simply placing all the blame at the other person's feet - they become more effective at managing both communication and conflict.

 

Has the *other person* taken responsibility for her role in the conflict?

 

Didn't think so. And why not... most people can't stomach the thought of actually admitting that they were *wrong*... and *being wrong* is an abstraction that is subject to a wide latitude of interpretations. How is *wrong* defined? What determines whether an action is *wrong* or not? See what I mean?

[SmoochieFace]

Ya gotta be kiddin me, SF. Seriously. It's not always because people hit too close to home. Sometimes they are just irritating.

 

And some opinions aren't worth hearing. Haven't you heard the saying "Opinions are like a**h***s, everyone has one (and usually they're full of s***)."

 

It's interesting to see what you present publicly, and how you react privately in pm.

 

No, I am not kidding. I am dead-on serious about my position on that.

 

So define what sort of opinions are not *worth hearing*... this should be interesting.

 

You don't know how I have reacted in PM concerning this conversation unless the *other person* decided to violate TOS and share PMs with you and others. You and I have not had any PMs concerning this thread.

[blind_otter]

Just because she chooses not to respond to your thread doesn't mean she doesn't take responsibility.

 

I've said this before, and you disagreed with me. I put it up to your inability to understand certain emotional nuances.

 

But honestly, it's not abadonment or rejection when you remove yourself from a situation that's frustrating, and you know you won't be able to contribute anything constructive. It's just a healthy enforcing of your boundaries.

[blind_otter]

No, I am not kidding. I am dead-on serious about my position on that.

 

So define what sort of opinions are not *worth hearing*... this should be interesting.

 

You don't know how I have reacted in PM concerning this conversation unless the *other person* decided to violate TOS and share PMs with you and others. You and I have not had any PMs concerning this thread.

 

Yeah, but we had a PM exchange before I put you on ignore a few weeks ago. That was what prompted me to put you on ignore, SF. I just didn't feel like I could say anything constructive to you any more, and the way you communcaited with me was making me reactive, so I removed myself from the interaction until I understood more about MYSELF and my reaction to YOU.

[Lil Honey]

Okay, well . . . this is enlightening.

 

I don't have any more answers, so gosh . . . I'll leave now, but keep in mind that I'm not "leaving when it suits me."

 

I have to take care of that stuff in the thing at the place. Bye.

[blind_otter]

Okay, well . . . this is enlightening.

 

I don't have any more answers, so gosh . . . I'll leave now, but keep in mind that I'm not "leaving when it suits me."

 

I have to take care of that stuff in the thing at the place. Bye.

 

I'm not really sure what the point of that was. Other than to be passive aggressive.

 

Ick. I don't necessarily think it's best to be nonconfrontational. I happen to like it better when I know someone doesn't like me, so I can avoid being around them.

[SmoochieFace]

Yeah, but we had a PM exchange before I put you on ignore a few weeks ago. That was what prompted me to put you on ignore, SF. I just didn't feel like I could say anything constructive to you any more, and the way you communcaited with me was making me reactive, so I removed myself from the interaction until I understood more about MYSELF and my reaction to YOU.

 

So, in other words, you took some responsibility in the role of the *conflict* we had.

 

I'm glad to see that we are getting along better these days. THAT is what I like to see.

 

And notice that we are not *at each other's throats* anymore too. Hmmm... wonder what that means?

[blind_otter]

It means that I don't react towards you anymore because I assume you simply don't understand ceratin emotional nuances.

 

It's hard though, to keep reminding myself of it. I don't really enjoy investing this much energy in trying to understand.

[SmoochieFace]

It means that I don't react towards you anymore because I assume you simply don't understand ceratin emotional nuances.

 

You're right - I don't. But being REACTIVE and calling someone names and acting like a dumbass doesn't exactly help the person who is having difficulty, right?

 

Not saying YOU did that to me but others here have...

 

 

I don't really enjoy investing this much energy in trying to understand.

 

Ah, but understanding does have its rewards! Just ask my GF.

[blind_otter]

You're right - I don't. But being REACTIVE and calling someone names and acting like a dumbass doesn't exactly help the person who is having difficulty, right?

 

Not saying YOU did that to me but others here have...

 

 

 

 

Ah, but understanding does have its rewards! Just ask my GF.

 

Great for your GF, there are no rewards for random people understanding you, SF.

 

And not everyone is or should be invested in helping you, it's not their responsibility.

 

Ok now I have to go back to work.

[lindya]

The "funny" part is, I've had nasty things directed to me, simply because I get along with him. Not funny ha-ha, but funny in an different, amusing sort of way. It enforces the idea that if Person X is well-liked, Person X's opinion is always right. If Person Y said that the building was on fire, no one would believe Person Y, because they don't like Person Y. Now, I'm sure some won't believe it or they will think I'm plum looney, BUT I've seen it happen.

 

I think most people will have witnessed that happen at some point. The scenario can be as simple as person A telling a joke that nobody laughs at, then person B telling the same joke and getting a standing ovation.

 

You don't know how I have reacted in PM concerning this conversation unless the *other person* decided to violate TOS and share PMs with you

 

When I first contributed to this thread, I assumed that you were talking about a disagreement you'd had with someone in RL. Starting negative threads about other forum users really isn't a great idea.