ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Learning to talk

As a general rule, it's a terrible mistake to take your lead on communication from actresses:
“Woman in a Meeting” is a language of its own.

It should not be, but it is. You will think that you have stated the case simply and effectively, and everyone else will wonder why you were so Terrifyingly Angry. Instead, you have to translate. You start with your thought, then you figure out how to say it as though you were offering a groveling apology for an unspecified error. (In fact, as Sloane Crosley pointed out in an essay earlier this year, the time you are most likely to say “I’m sorry” is the time when you feel that you, personally, have just been grievously wronged. Not vice versa.)

To illustrate this difficulty, I have taken the liberty of translating some famous sentences into the phrases a woman would have to use to say them during a meeting not to be perceived as angry, threatening or (gasp!) bitchy.

“Give me liberty, or give me death.”
Woman in a Meeting: “Dave, if I could, I could just — I just really feel like if we had liberty it would be terrific, and the alternative would just be awful, you know? That’s just how it strikes me. I don’t know.”

“I have a dream today!”
Woman in a Meeting: “I’m sorry, I just had this idea — it’s probably crazy, but — look, just as long as we’re throwing things out here — I had sort of an idea or vision about maybe the future?”

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”
Woman in a Meeting: “I’m sorry, Mikhail, if I could? Didn’t mean to cut you off there. Can we agree that this wall maybe isn’t quite doing what it should be doing? Just looking at everything everyone’s been saying, it seems like we could consider removing it. Possibly. I don’t know, what does the room feel?”
As with most erroneous conclusions, the fault is in the assumptions. "You will think that you have stated the case simply and effectively" is where the problem is. Where the writer, and the actress before her, are wrong is in believing that their feelings about how they have stated the case are conclusive.

In all communication, the primary responsibility lies with the person talking, not the person being addressed. If people regularly misinterpret you, the fault is almost always your fault, not theirs. If women "speaking their opinion" are often perceived as angry, then, assuming they are not angry, it is obvious they are inadvertently or unconsciously sending out signals that are easily misinterpreted as anger.

The problem, I suspect, is that many women have zero self-confidence. That's why about 50 percent of all individual female products are sold on the basis of claims that they will improve the buyer's confidence. (The other half concern divulging the secret of an envied woman's success in looking prettier than the buyer.) And what most people lacking in self-confidence do when they are trying to state their opinion or speak up for themselves is either a) apologize in advance in the manner demonstrated above or b) overcompensate and come off as angry.

It's absurd to say that women are speaking in this way out of fear of being perceived as Terrifyingly Angry, they are doing so because they are Ridiculously Insecure.

The fact is that if you have to steel yourself and work yourself up to simply stating your opinion, or worse, do so just to cite a straightforward fact, you are almost always going to come off badly. Your behavior and expression will not be consistent with your message. Most of these women who think they are just stating the case simply and effectively would be shocked if they saw a video of themselves doing it and saw their furrowed brows, angry facial expressions, and heard how their voices were raised as if in anger.

Compounding the problem is that the natural solipsism of women combines with that lack of self-confidence so they make it all about themselves. Note how many "I" references there are in the three examples above: nearly four per example. Just to be clear, the normal male response to this rambling "I just feel that I think I should be able to express what I feel is the right thing to do" is "who the fuck cares?"

Women are also more inclined than men to see criticism of an idea they have expressed as personal criticism and react angrily to it. Does someone telling you "that's a stupid idea" make you angry and feel personally attacked? Well, then you probably ARE angry and your speech and facial expressions accurately reflect that.

Now, I've been in more than a few business meetings with women, and certainly some have spoken in a way that I would describe as "Oh Sweet Darwin, get to the fucking point before we evolve into a new species and all of this becomes irrelevant". But plenty of them speak normally, without either anger or apology, and I've noticed that those tend to be the more competent women. No drama, no theatrics, no uptalk, just normal, straightforward communication.

Just talk. It's not that hard. Stop couching and overcompensating and trying to frame, and foreshadow, and pre-convince, and talk. If you think X, say "I think X." That's it. That's all you have to do. You don't have to apologize for it or get upset if someone comes back with "I think X is stupid, I think Y." You think what you think. They think what they think. It's not a sin or a crime to disagree.

Labels: ,

155 Comments:

Blogger DadOfTen October 21, 2015 6:07 AM  

How does this translate into the Korean culture with 5 levels of respect embedded in the language? Or Japanese or Chinese culture? Asian Indian? Navajo?

I have seen a lot of examples of self deprecating speech patterns. Is the English speaking culture different?

Blogger peter blandings October 21, 2015 6:14 AM  

Who the fuck cares?

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery October 21, 2015 6:15 AM  

I sense that Petri was aiming for funny, but missed and hit "feminist with a chip on her shoulder" instead.

I do fucktons of business meetings with women. The majority of them are calm, competent and professional.

So I think this is just another fantasy problem, like the blue-haired landwhales who fondly imagine that men are desperate to rape them.

I don't think Alexandra Petri (WNB) has been in a business meeting in her young life. She probably thinks the business world is all about smirking Mad Men-esque misogyny and OCP executives snorting cocaine off hookers' tits.

But that rarely happens these days. You can't even get a blowjob off an intern without filling out a health and safety risk assessment.

Blogger Unknown October 21, 2015 6:25 AM  

What's in your head is not the same as what you transmit with our language. Men need to learn this as well, but I observe that women have a much harder time understanding that.

Writing alot helps this tremendously. Write down your idea and read it a couple of days later. Do you understand?

That being said: I rarely observe this in business meetings..and when I do, I always want a written 'proposal' or idea sketch.

Blogger Thomas Davidsmeier October 21, 2015 6:29 AM  

How much of this effect is cause by women's typically weaker physical stature? How can you have self-confidence when you know everybody around you is stronger and faster than you, even if you can't/won't admit that consciously?

That said, it can't be all of it, because I've seen a few women act this way toward their own much smaller and weaker children.

Blogger Rantor October 21, 2015 6:40 AM  

I work in an office with a gamma male who talks like this. It's bad enough when he speaks. It is worse when he tries to tell a joke. (TLDR first he tells you how funny the joke is, then how it made him laugh, then the first line, then he makes sure you understood the first line, etc. by the time he gets to the punch line you just want to be anywhere else.).

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery October 21, 2015 6:45 AM  

Thomas - the most aggressive people I know are small men.

Disordered communication is a product of a disordered mind. Young women are the worst examples of this, because their already hormonal brains have been furthered softened by a lifetime of unearned praise, social media, and the shitty modern education system.

So we get girls like Miss Petri, who think Jennifer Lawrence and Lena Sister-Fister Dunham are appropriate role models for how to behave in business meetings.

Thatcher wept.

Blogger Dago October 21, 2015 6:48 AM  

Wait, why is the woman, who can only be there to serve sandwiches to the men, speaking in the meeting?

Blogger vashine October 21, 2015 7:04 AM  

This. Awesome.

I would add that part of the problem of this woman and most other women (especially SJWs and the like) is that having never truly faced and disciplined their emotions, nor having ever attempted to align them with reality and Truth, when they HEAR men and male leaders express and explain rational thought processes and logical arguments, they FEEL and HEAR anger or fear if those males are refuting and deconstructing one of their dearly held beliefs, wishes, or desires. So on top of them attempting to overcome their insecurities by engaging in try-hard that comes off as anger or fear, they actually think and believer that that is how the men sound and communicate, so they think they need to do the same. Except we men don't sound that way to each other, or anyone who is listening calmly and without insecurity and fear.

I have finally realized that the vast majority of women (leaving out only a rare few) HEAR and FEEL violence, fear, and anger merely because someone is openly and/or publicly taking a stand in opposition to her own position. They hear such anger and 'violence' because they are projecting their own emotional chaos, fear, and anger onto the words and the person who is speaking. Realizing this basic truth of most women in most situations has liberated me from caring and striving so much to convince them with logic, reason, or any dialectical argument because they are quite literally incapable and/or unwilling to even hear what I'm saying. They are only hearing their own fears (or "violence") and not processing or considering anything I'm actually saying, or even how I might be saying it, or even in what context we are discussing the topic.

It does not matter how unemotional you are, how apologetically or obsequiously you state your case, how hyper-sensitive and careful you are not to 'offend' her or others around, she will hear and feel it as something utterly scary, shocking, even 'violent'... because she is utterly insecure and deeply unsure of herself and the world around her. And even more so in public where she could lose face and social status if she is seen to be wrong about something.

Blogger vashine October 21, 2015 7:05 AM  

I had a female Spanish teacher in a South American city who was telling me about the few female bus drivers working in that city. She said that one day a man walked onto a bus, saw the female driver, and said "oh, that's safe."

While I was laughing my arse off, she was incredulous that a man would ever dare say such a thing, and said, "That is VIOLENCE."

She meant it. I even questioned her on it. She completely believed (see: felt) that the word "violence" was applicable to what that man said and "did". In her mind and her world, it was the SAME as if the man had actually hit the bus driver, engaging in true and real violence. She wanted to raise that mere comment, a few harmless words, to the same level as a physically violent act, a physical assault.... because "feelings."

This is why women can never, ever, ever be in power, be allowed to vote, be in charge of nations or communities and be making decisions of great consequence to communities, states, or nations. Especially decisions about war and immigration. Their emotional impulses are so strong, so dominating, that they are unable to even respect the basic definitions of basic words like "violence". Their desire to justify their personal and female-centric, misplaced emotions drive them to such insanity, to blaming others, to redefining the words of entire languages and justify their out-of-control emotions, has them destroying the meaning of basic words, and eventually ruining and gutting entire NATIONS in this endless and merciless quest for self-justification. It is solipsism gone mad, with serious, serious consequences.

See: Merkel, Hillary Clinton, and the like. See: the female voting block in EVERY Western nation. See: hen-pecked Western males who have ceded almost ALL power to the emotional manipulation and demands of their "women", who have refused to bear more than one or two children, been poor mothers to the others they birthed, and turned their own sons in abject pussies and losers. See: the vicious and audacious enforcement of feminism and political correctness by teenage girls who think they know everything, by career women or social rejects who feel threatened by any thought or idea that might marginalize or refute their own feelings or vanity. See: the female-dominated, fem-centric, and suicidal Welcome Refugees movement in Germany and other European nations where women, due to a gross perversion of 'compassion', an unchecked flood of emotionalism in the bodies of hormone-driven girls and women taking hits off the crack pipe of misplaced motherly instincts and warped, extremist sentimentalism.

And on and on. The examples are endless.

I have come to see that this happens to even the BEST of our women in the West. In a moment, even the women who know the score, who know the truth when it comes to politics, economics, feminism, Islam, etc., even those women who are so well-versed, can be bowled over and OWNED by their fears, insecurities, and emotions in an instant, ditching ALL their professed values and beliefs in a momentary scramble to save face or not "hurt" some person's feeeeeeelings. I've seen it, heard it. I've pulled that knife out of my own back.

And thank God it happened, because I know the landscape of reality even better. One more pretty little lie unmasked. One more delusion I no longer suffer from.

Thank you God. Have mercy on them.

Blogger Sherwood family October 21, 2015 7:20 AM  

In my work place the people who have been most condescending to other people in meetings and the worst to the women I work have been other women. I have been in a couple of meetings where calm and reasoned discussion was completely shut down by the meeting chairman (woman) who seemed threatened by the opinions of others. One of the women I work with has been left in tears on a couple of occasions by two other women who were either very publicly rude and dismissive or catty and passive aggressive to such an extent that she could not work with them as part of the joint task they were supposed to be accomplishing.

Even with my worst boss (who happened to be a man) we still worked with a degree of camaraderie and effectiveness that seems conspicuously absent from a number of interactions I have seen between women at my work place.

Blogger epobirs October 21, 2015 7:21 AM  

The whole thing starts off on a false premise. Jennifer Lawrence did not have a good point. She was paid for 'American Hustle' exactly in proportion to her prominence within the film and her general rank within Hollywood at the time of the casting.

It's been noted that if you compared the screen time of each actor's character and measure their salary by what they contributed to the film, Lawrence's rate of pay came very close to Cooper's on a per minute basis. Her role could very easily been given to any number of aspiring young women with even less credentials and more need for a major role to build their resume, thus saving the production millions of dollars. It's not as if her demographic was well aligned with that of the film's target audience. Her position in the credits is marked an 'and' before her name, marking her lack of prominence within the story.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 7:27 AM  

This must be some version of projection, because it's women (and effeminate males) who insist on this kind of 'dancing up to the point' communication. Men sure as hell didn't ask for it, from men or women.

Recent case in point: Sarah Sharpe and her complaints that discussion on the Linux kernel mailing list is "brutal." It's women and Gammas who demand that all criticism be wrapped in verbal cotton candy so the recipient doesn't experience feelbad.

Blogger Sherwood family October 21, 2015 7:33 AM  

Vashine, I had to go through this kind of thing early on in my marriage.

When I would explain to my wife that something she had said was not logical she would take it as a personal attack, as though I was saying she was bad or stupid.

It took me a little while to train her to understand that a discussion about her views or statements was not a discussion about her as a person or her general worth.

For her, at that time, there was no objective space. It was all personal all the time and disagreeing or pointing out logical flaws in something she was suggesting was a personal affront. Thankfully, she understands now that this is not the case and we can carry on a rational and reasonable discussion about most topics.

But for her it requires continuous effort to maintain that understanding whereas I think it is hardwired for men to be able to attack a viewpoint or idea without attacking a person and to receive criticism of an idea or action without taking it personally.

Blogger Tom Arrow October 21, 2015 7:36 AM  

Cool.

Blogger Ron Winkleheimer October 21, 2015 7:41 AM  

You think what you think. They think what they think. It's not a sin or a crime to disagree.

That's the essence of the difference between SJWs and just about everyone else,

Blogger VD October 21, 2015 7:43 AM  

'dancing up to the point' communication

Good description. I usually think of it as "avoiding the point". It's like they think they're building up to a grand punchline or something that is going to change your life, except they never are. "I'm going to tell you... I'm going to tell you... I'm going to tell you...." It's actually a good Gamma tell.

Just tell me already and stop making such a bloody production of it.

Blogger Steveo #238 October 21, 2015 7:56 AM  

@2 Timing is everything... beautiful.




Blogger Gaiseric October 21, 2015 8:06 AM  

It's interesting that here you point out the basic insecurity and lack of self-esteem inherent in most Western women, whereas Roissy at Chateau Heartiste says that runaway self-esteem in Western women is one of their main problems.

I think it's a problem with terminology to some degree, though. Roissy is simply wrong, because what Western women today are plagued with isn't too much self-esteem, it's brittle narcissism. True self-esteem and self-confidence can only come on the back of actual accomplishment. If you are good and something... anything... and you know it, then drives legitimate self-worth. If you're constantly told that you're special but deep down you know that you haven't done anything and can't really do anything, that creates a subconscious cognitive dissonance that leads to exactly this kind of catty, narcissistic behavior described in the article here.

Blogger Sherwood family October 21, 2015 8:11 AM  

Gaiseric, your second paragraph is gold and points out the root of why there seem to be so many screwed up individuals floating around society these days.

As others have noted: Competence leads to Confidence. People who are actually confident don't have to run others through the social meat grinder or project their own failures onto those around them.

OpenID elijahrhodes October 21, 2015 8:15 AM  

Women are also more inclined than men to see criticism of an idea they have expressed as personal criticism and react angrily to it.

I've noticed this general tendency in women too, both personally and professionally. Just like the Gamma, the political is always personal. Many men suffer this trait too, which I find absolutely annoying. Nothing worse than sitting in a business meeting that should have taken 15 minutes max, than to sit for an hour listening to insecure people exploring their feelings for an hour. Just come out and say what you think! It's not that hard.

Blogger Josh October 21, 2015 8:22 AM  

It's like they think they're building up to a grand punchline or something that is going to change your life, except they never are. "I'm going to tell you... I'm going to tell you... I'm going to tell you...." It's actually a good Gamma tell.

Butters: [gets off the sofa] Listen, buddy! You promised that pizzas were on the way! If they don't show up right now, you're gonna have a dead kid in your hands! Do you hear me?!
GRRM: Okay, okay, fine fine. What kind of pizzas do you want?
Butters: What kind do we want?!
Scott: He hasn't even ordered the pizzas yet!
GRRM: Don't worry! They're coming! Not just two pizzas, there's, there's gonna be five! And they're gonna be huge! You won't believe it!

Blogger Desiderius October 21, 2015 8:26 AM  

"It's not a sin or a crime to disagree."

+1

"If you think X, say 'I think X.' That's it."

Just "X" works.

Blogger Taco Tuesday October 21, 2015 8:33 AM  

If people regularly misinterpret you, the fault is almost always your fault, not theirs.

Hmmm, you don't say, Vox.

Blogger Tank October 21, 2015 8:39 AM  

Listening to people who "dance up to the point" is so aggravating that, when they finally get to the point, the listener is already hostile.

What I hear in my head during the dance is, "just f****g say it already."

Blogger Jourdan October 21, 2015 8:41 AM  

One of the interesting things I've noticed now that I've entered middle age is watching how the younger generation of men at my work communicate. The only way I can describe it is womanly.

Everything is couched ahead of time to avoid giving the impression of hurting anyone's feelings. The words "kind of" and "sort of" (kinda, sorta) are liberally sprinkled in so that the speaker can disassociate himself from his ideas if he finds later he's insulted someone or hurt someone's feelings. The verbal lilt at the end of each sentence is used, to signify that they aren't entirely sure of their idea, and perhaps they are merely offering a question, playing Devil's Advocate so to speak.

Add to the the feminized voices young men now use--most sound like old stereotypes of gays talking--and you get a very revolting picture, BUT one which meshes with and works well with their women colleagues, who make up about 55% of my work's personnel.

It's really astounding to watch, from a sociological perspective, though very painful from the perspective of manhood and masculinity.

Blogger Joe Doakes October 21, 2015 8:43 AM  

Taco@24: "misinterpret" =/= "distort."

Liberals regularly distort what Vox says, not because he fails to communicate clearly, but because they don't agree with what he clearly communicated.


Blogger Diddy Pimptastic October 21, 2015 8:49 AM  

Yo Steve my Dark Nigga of Mockery the hoes in my meetings don't say nuthin except when they're axed ta, ya know what I mean. And none of them health and safety risk assessments for a real pimp you jus gotta smack that ho like a domino. That Thatcher bitch be crying you gotta smack that bitch too.

Vashine bitch getcha y'own blog; niggas ain't got time ta read all them words

Blogger Trimegistus October 21, 2015 8:53 AM  

I belong to a group of professional freelancers, who get together to compare and critique our work on a regular basis. One of the ongoing "problems" in the group is our inability to retain female members — because they can't stand actual criticism of their work. There are two who are sufficiently professional and experienced, and they've stuck with the group and even made some useful contributions.

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery October 21, 2015 8:57 AM  

Diddy P - you jus gotta smack that ho like a domino

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 8:59 AM  

this strikes me much more as a millennial thing than a woman thing. How old are the women in question?

Millennials are the ones obsessed with consensus and totally adverse to anything even remotely confrontational or negative.

Blogger bob k. mando October 21, 2015 9:00 AM  

VD
If you think X, say "I think X." That's it. That's all you have to do.



if the goal was simply to get her opinion across to listeners, that would be all that's necessary.

if her goal is to manipulate her listeners, "If you think X, say "I think X"" is far, FAR too limiting.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 9:00 AM  

I've been in conversations online that went like this: First guy makes a claim -- not harshly, but matter-of-fact. Second person (often a woman, but not necessarily) reacts with umbrage, "I can't believe you would say that!" I then chime in to say the same thing as the first guy, but larded up with anecdotes and softer language. Then the second person thanks me for standing up to the first guy and setting him straight -- which I didn't do at all.

So it had nothing to do with the facts or whether we were correct. It was entirely that the first guy's words made the second person feel bad, while I "affirmed her feelings" first. I made her feel like I understood her, at which point I could say pretty much anything I wanted and she wouldn't be offended, whether she agreed or not.

I don't do it much anymore, because it's tiring like dealing with toddlers, and it's much more pleasant to just hang out with men who can communicate without slathering their stuff all over everything. But if you need to communicate with women in their language, that's how they do it.

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 9:02 AM  

I dunno mate... seems you're white washing the standard tactic of using "omg you're so angry!" as a shield. I mean its classic rabbit response to dialect and it has nothing to do with tone or non-verbal communication.

Blogger Iowahine October 21, 2015 9:17 AM  

Exactly. Yes.

Blogger Desiderius October 21, 2015 9:18 AM  

Cail,

"Recent case in point: Sarah Sharpe and her complaints that discussion on the Linux kernel mailing list is "brutal." It's women and Gammas who demand that all criticism be wrapped in verbal cotton candy so the recipient doesn't experience feelbad."

As Vashine suggested, the feelbad comes first (experiencing disagreement as aggression), then they back-rationalize the lack of cotton-candy wrapping to justify their feelings. This is why any attempt at actually softening the blow, apologies, etc. do not help.

If you're in a situation where you have to deal with people like this (primarily just simple immaturity) you've got to lay some groundwork ahead of time before disagreement is an issue, for instance by demonstrating how to handle disagreement productively. I'm thinking of the teaching example where I'll give students bonus points for catching a mistake I've made. Early in the term I'll make sure to make a couple to break the ice. Sometimes I'll ask them to give me a wrong answer, so they can see it's not so bad.

Obv given the choice between working with mature adults and immature gammas/women, the former is preferable.

Blogger Dexter October 21, 2015 9:19 AM  

She probably thinks the business world is all about smirking Mad Men-esque misogyny and OCP executives snorting cocaine off hookers' tits.

Goddamnit, I never get invited to those meetings. Must be happening up on the executive floor.

Blogger Diddy Pimptastic October 21, 2015 9:22 AM  

Yo Steve that be the top nigga in dat way. Give a brother a break my nigga, pass me some numbers for those blue-do landwhales, ya know some brothas be into dat

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 9:22 AM  

Nate, if you're talking to me, I agree, and I don't mean to whitewash it. You're right: they can't handle dialectic, regardless of the tone. Even when there's no tone at all, just a matter-of-fact statement in text, they project their own emotions on it.

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 9:25 AM  

"One of the interesting things I've noticed now that I've entered middle age is watching how the younger generation of men at my work communicate. The only way I can describe it is womanly."

its a millennial thing. They are literally allergic to criticism to the point that everything must be held up for consensus. If you google Generation Wuss there is a lot of stuff that explains it.

Blogger Gaiseric October 21, 2015 9:27 AM  

@31 this strikes me much more as a millennial thing than a woman thing. How old are the women in question?

Millennials are the ones obsessed with consensus and totally adverse to anything even remotely confrontational or negative.


Because Millennials have grown up in a hyper-feminized society which has been indoctrinated by decades of pro-feminist misandrist cultishness. In other words; there's no functional difference between the distinction you make.

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 9:27 AM  

"Nate, if you're talking to me, I agree, and I don't mean to whitewash it"

nah mate that was for Vox. This whole post strikes me as bizarre. especially coming from a generally very happy guy that gets called angry all the time by angry people who disagree with him.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 9:28 AM  

As Vashine suggested, the feelbad comes first (experiencing disagreement as aggression), then they back-rationalize the lack of cotton-candy wrapping to justify their feelings.

Right. What really bothered Sarah Sharpe about the Linux kernel list wasn't Linus's few rants; that was just the hook she could use to complain. The real "problem" was the fact that men were talking on a regular basis in terms of "this code is good, that code is bad, this sucks, that should be removed," without dancing up to each statement of judgment with some hugs to make sure everyone felt good first.

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 9:31 AM  

" In other words; there's no functional difference between the distinction you make. "

OMG!

millennials have adopted feminine behavior patterns?

I never thought of that! Who knew?

Thanks for this. So brave!

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 9:38 AM  

"Stop couching and overcompensating and trying to frame, and foreshadow, and pre-convince, and talk. If you think X, say "I think X." That's it. That's all you have to do. You don't have to apologize for it or get upset if someone comes back with "I think X is stupid, I think Y." You think what you think. They think what they think. It's not a sin or a crime to disagree."

See this is where I think you've gone off the rails. It is a sin and a crime to disagree to these people. Because disagreement causes Feelbad... and that is a sin. Everything has to be positive. Like Like Like. All of this bizarre flopping around and couching is part of their consensus building ritual. The make these strange statements that slowly work in one direction or another and eventually it leads to a consensus conclusion... and everyone can claim they never disagreed with it.

Thus.. no feelbad or mindhurt. Also... no cruel.

Blogger Aeoli Pera October 21, 2015 9:39 AM  

Shut up Nate we soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo have not.

Blogger DadOfTen October 21, 2015 9:43 AM  

I just reopened Dale Carnegie's, "How To Win Friends And Influence People". It is a wonderful book about communicating with people who want to get things done. I love the phrase, "A man convinced against his will Is of the same opinion still."

As I look at it, I see it will be a total failure trying to communicate clearly with SJW's. Back in that day you could bet that SJW's would quickly be brought back into line by harsh reality. Parts of the techniques Carnegie taught, without the moral strength he expected, result in the communication dance you mentioned.

In 1985 I had a female manager who was known for running a tight ship and being very harsh on other women on her programming teams. None of us men ever noticed she was harsh to us or the occasional woman on the team. At one point she even appointed a woman as a team leader. That woman was short-lived. Other women couldn't deal with this woman who was raised in the harsh environment of Latvia before coming to the USA. Her communications were straight to the point. From her upbringing she knew that you had to set exact expectations and communicate fearlessly or you will get stomped on. The men who could do the work well thrived on it.

Blogger Alexander October 21, 2015 9:45 AM  

See Nate, I think I get what you are trying to say, but it's coming off... overly negative, maybe? It seems like you have a valid point - I'm not trying to criticize you, but maybe you could try and make it in a way that's more constructive and positive than all the way you're doing it... it just makes people feel bad which isn't solving communication problems, you know?

Blogger Derrick Bonsell October 21, 2015 9:49 AM  

There's something ironic that conservative America's sex object Chris Kyle was played by Bradley Cooper who's helping Miss Lawrence in her quest.

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 9:55 AM  

Someone, can't remember who, made a great point that we all too often "dance up to the point" in prayer too. "We praise you, Lord!" is not actually praising Him, it is a statement of intent about praising Him in the very near future.

Future that usually never comes. Only the statement of intent is repeated over and over again.

Blogger slarrow October 21, 2015 9:57 AM  

Who thinks that oratory like "I have a dream" or "give me liberty or give me death" shows up in a business meeting?

Blogger BunE22 October 21, 2015 9:57 AM  

I couldn't care less about Jennifer Lawrence and her quest for equal pay. Petri's rewording of those famous quotes is a fail. If women actually speak like that then blame the ridiculous PC culture, it forces people to walk on eggshells. Thanks, SJWs. And you call yourselves Progressive.

Since what Lawrence actually said to her male employee is not mentioned in any article on this I can be sure it wouldn't fit the narrative being pushed.

Blogger Derrick Bonsell October 21, 2015 9:58 AM  

The purpose of women is to have children. The purpose of men is to secure the best woman willing to have a child with them. This is why men worked in public and brought home wages. Those who crusade for equality of outcome between men and women completely deny this but they don't know what they're talking about.

I don't wish to prevent women from getting degrees and careers. That's an extension of the previous paragraph that I'm uncomfortable advocating but there it is.

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery October 21, 2015 10:05 AM  

Dexter - Goddamnit, I never get invited to those meetings. Must be happening up on the executive floor.

Eh, business class hookers are overrated anyway.

Did you see that pair Bob Morton hired in RoboCop?

They looked like they failed an audition for The Golden Girls.

Blogger Aeoli Pera October 21, 2015 10:06 AM  

I have thoughts on OP.

1. Vox is right about the solipsism re: facial contortions. People who are out of their element and exerting significant mental effort forget to control their face and tone. 2/3 women are out of their element simply from F-T mismatch (MBTI, feeling vs. thinking). When called on it, most people won't admit it because pride balks under pressure.

2. Stress and high pressure make a huge difference. The female response to DANGER signals in the brain is a lot stronger than the male response. Testosterone acts as some kind of heat sink here, turning anxiety into focus and stress into anger. I have an idea how one of those probably works but this isn't the time or place.

3. The girl is projecting her particular problems on all girls. While there are many general truths about gender differences in the realms of physical fitness, emotions, and instincts, there is little effective sexual dimorphism at the cognitive level within 2SD of the mean (99% of the population).

4. The female penchant for dissembling (talking around a problem rather than directly at it) only kicks in when they're talking about people, child-rearing, sex, etc. If the subject is improving the house, a man and woman of similar MBTI and intelligence will sound exactly the same.

Blogger Student in Blue October 21, 2015 10:09 AM  

@Nate
I dunno mate... seems you're white washing the standard tactic of using "omg you're so angry!" as a shield. I mean its classic rabbit response to dialect and it has nothing to do with tone or non-verbal communication.

You're giving rabbits far too much credit. They're not calculatingly responding to dialectic disagreement, they're knee-jerk reacting to the emotional, which very much has to do with tone and non-verbal communication.

The fact that it's a classic rabbit response doesn't preclude it from being based on tone or non-verbal communication.

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 10:09 AM  

" Goddamnit, I never get invited to those meetings. Must be happening up on the executive floor."

I have. no coke... but plenty of working girls. You'd be surprised how many places consider a complimentary trip to the brothel or a visit from a working girl to be standard business courtesy.

Blogger Alexander October 21, 2015 10:10 AM  

It's interesting how she subverts the entire meaning of the phrase.

Give me Liberty or give me death means I would rather die than be a slave.

The female version is 'well, I'll have liberty because I don't want to die.'

Which is contextually nonsensical as well as utterly lacking in the courage of the original statement.

So women might want to work on that, as well.

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 10:11 AM  

"The fact that it's a classic rabbit response doesn't preclude it from being based on tone or non-verbal communication."

I dont' think so. The issue isn't the tone. The issue is you taking a firm position to early in the consensus ritual.

Blogger Aeoli Pera October 21, 2015 10:16 AM  

"I dont' think so. The issue isn't the tone. The issue is you taking a firm position to early in the consensus ritual."

Ditto this. Read any of their fiction or nonfiction and you will see that being an emotional wreck is just currency for people who are, deep down, excessively calculating and manipulative. And not very smart.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 10:17 AM  

If women actually speak like that then blame the ridiculous PC culture,

Which is in the water, I guess?

I worked a couple years around 1990 in an office that was almost entirely female. This is how women communicate in the herd. Yeah, the examples above are exaggerated, but not by much.

Blogger Diddy Pimptastic October 21, 2015 10:20 AM  

a visit from a working girl to be standard business courtesy

Now dat be wut I'm talkin bout my brother, give a nigga a call next time ya'ready for some bitches

Blogger Gaiseric October 21, 2015 10:23 AM  

I never thought of that! Who knew?

Thanks for this. So brave!


Heh. Well, you're the one who tried to say that it was Millennial INSTEAD of feminine. If you actually meant that Millennials were feminine all along, why did you make a distinction between them?

Blogger Student in Blue October 21, 2015 10:26 AM  

@Nate
I dont' think so. The issue isn't the tone. The issue is you taking a firm position to early in the consensus ritual.

Again, signaling a firm position too early doesn't preclude tone. In fact, I'd say it's the same thing - the real sin being committed by signaling too early is that your tone is not properly submissive enough.

Blogger Diddy Pimptastic October 21, 2015 10:27 AM  

Did you see that pair Bob Morton hired in RoboCop?

Steve my nigga dat be some ol' skool bitches. I got'em ol' skool, new skool, jus outta skool, in skool. Hook a brother up.

Blogger VD October 21, 2015 10:38 AM  

See Nate, I think I get what you are trying to say, but it's coming off... overly negative, maybe? It seems like you have a valid point - I'm not trying to criticize you, but maybe you could try and make it in a way that's more constructive and positive than all the way you're doing it... it just makes people feel bad which isn't solving communication problems, you know?

Yeah, Nate.

Blogger Robert Coble October 21, 2015 10:38 AM  

The observations regarding the feminazification of American society is spot on. Thank the Progressive SJW movement for institutionalizing itself in the form of the Dept.. of (MAL-)Education. It now permeates all levels of government and large companies.

Two short anecdotes.

I used to have to sit through government meetings, listening to endless aversions to and diversions from straight-forward discussion of an issue. One of my personal "hot buttons" was to hear someone prefacing everything she (usually a woman, but too often a man) said with "The thought process is ...". My frustration finally boiled over one day, and I stopped the practice (at least when I was in a meeting) with "Everybody look out! There's a disconnected thought process running loose in the room!" No, I was one of the first-level managers, not the one running the show. One of my observations about management status meetings is this: The purpose of a 'status meeting' is to emphasize the status of the person who called the meeting, NOT to determine the 'status' of the project in question. 99% of the time, there will be no real status information conveyed. Instead, all you hear is "On time, on schedule" ad nauseum, regardless of the truth of the situation.

One of my current woman co-workers accuses me of being "hard" (meaning direct and to the point) because of my military background. It has nothing to do with my background; I just hate beating around the bush. She continually tries to get me to "intervene" with our boss on something she "feels" should be done. My usual response: "Not my circus; not my monkeys." The look on her face the first time I said that was priceless. She's black, and I thought for a second that she was going to call the diversity police in HR because I was "being racist." I REALLY hate it when I have to explain that I'm not the boss, I don't aspire to the boss job (been there, done that, no thank you!), and if she wants something conveyed to the boss, SHE should do it directly. Almost always, her response is the "Emily Litella" gambit: "Never mind." That is usually followed in a few days with another attempt to get me to talk to the boss about the same (non-)issue. I've told her point-blank "If you 'feel' that you must instruct the boss in how to do his job, 'feel' free to discuss it with him directly. If I have a point to make or a bone of contention with the boss, I'll tell him myself." IT NEVER REGISTERS!

Blogger Nate October 21, 2015 10:47 AM  

"Yeah, Nate."

I have given mindhurt and feelbad. Also cruel.

Blogger papabear October 21, 2015 10:49 AM  

"Do you have b*tchy resting face?" www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v98CPXNiSk

Blogger GracieLou October 21, 2015 10:53 AM  

The last 'Nuts and Bolts' meeting at the religious school I worked had a session on our 'ministry' as teachers--how do we bring the love of Christ to the children--what's our motivation? What followed was a bacchanalia of fluff unrelated to any historical form of Christianity. I said, "My motivation? How about Hell is a real place and people actually go there." (You got to get your mind right, and I do mean right...). Silence. Well, so, about the HSA plan this year...

Did they think I was a bitch? Hell I don't care, error has no rights.

OpenID vilefacelessminion October 21, 2015 10:55 AM  

Millennials ... yeah. I had one want to go to lunch with me for a "dispassionate discussion" blah blah blah. Long story short? I disagreed with him on something. It was surreal. It rocked his world to the point where he doubted he was a good fit for the company because I held a different opinion.

Although I got a kick out of the fact that the "dispassionate" discussion was 100% about emotions. This one even had the audacity to claim he "had a pretty thick skin."

Blogger CarpeOro October 21, 2015 11:44 AM  

"In all communication, the primary responsibility lies with the person talking, not the person being addressed. If people regularly misinterpret you, the fault is almost always your fault, not theirs."

What I try to live by. Examining what I have written in a failed exchange often offers an insight in to another way to communicate the point. Groveling not included.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 11:49 AM  

Although I got a kick out of the fact that the "dispassionate" discussion was 100% about emotions. This one even had the audacity to claim he "had a pretty thick skin."

He may, compared to his mommy. In hindsight, it seems pretty predictable that having a generation of boys raised by divorced, single, or empowered mothers would produce a bunch of effeminate men.

Blogger pdwalker October 21, 2015 12:01 PM  

So how many of you train your daughters to watch out for this?

When they ramble on about something, do you call them on it? Do you point out a better way to communicate with men? Do you even ask if they actually have a point and when will they get to it?

It takes a while, but they can learn to improve.

Blogger Rabbi B October 21, 2015 12:09 PM  

"So how many of you train your daughters to watch out for this?"

I have helped my wife with this. She has improved tremendously.

Sometimes it's entertaining though, and I just let her go with a smirk on my face until she tunes in and catches herself.

Blogger Rabbi B October 21, 2015 12:09 PM  

"Just the facts ma'am."

Blogger Dave October 21, 2015 12:12 PM  

"dispassionate discussion"

What man has ever said this?

Blogger Patrick Kelly October 21, 2015 12:14 PM  

Notice all her examples are from stuff alpha males said while leading.

Blogger Daniel October 21, 2015 12:21 PM  

@52 Since what Lawrence actually said to her male employee is not mentioned in any article on this I can be sure it wouldn't fit the narrative being pushed.

Well, since the employee said "Whoa! We're all on the same team here!"

The options for the "blunt" thing that the gal originally said are:

a) "Chris, it's all your fault that I failed my last audition."
b) "I don't know, maybe, like, I'm sorry, but our accountants suck."
c) "I hate to be super blunt, but I'm going to come right out and say it as soon as the people I want to gripe about are out of the room."

I'm going with option c)

If it were really just something blunt like, "Our last project failed," the "we/team" response would be incoherent, unless she hires gammas exclusively, which I suppose could be yet another option.

Blogger Marie October 21, 2015 12:23 PM  

"So how many of you train your daughters to watch out for this?"

BINGO!

Also, teach your sons not to tell girls this behavior is cute/acceptable on the off chance they might get laid. Because then your sons will turn 40 and sit in a boardroom with the women cat-fighting and talking about their feelings wondering how the hell these women got to adulthood thinking this was acceptable.

It is a mystery, I tell ya.

Blogger Daniel October 21, 2015 12:25 PM  

@77

"dispassionate discussion"

What man has ever said this?


The only thing the millennials have going for them is they have the benefit of a generation ahead of them who is happy to beat manhood into them for the sake of the future. Their would-be prototype - the idiot Boomers - had the Silents just ahead of them who earned their cohort name for a reason.

X may be a lot of things, but "silent" isn't on the list.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 12:43 PM  

"dispassionate discussion"

What man has ever said this?


Seriously? (He didn't use that exact phrase, but a few of his commenters have, and they weren't being ironic.)

Blogger CurlyQ October 21, 2015 12:44 PM  

Nate and others have hit the nail on the head when they say it is a generational thing. I remember interviewing a woman born in 1922 about her experience through WW2 and life in general. She talked about thinking of becoming a dentist but wanting a family more, and when I asked if back then it was difficult for women to get into careers back then (feminist narrative) she looked at me like I was crazy and asked, "Why would it have been?" Her confidence in her abilities and lack of victim mentality was amazing, and I have noted similar attitudes in my own grandmother and various geriatric patients I had grown closer to.
It's hardly surprising the current generation has turned out the way it has bombarded with "You're the victim" propaganda and the "strong, independent women" figures in the media all boil down to whining, narcissistic bitches.
Fatherless homes and poor relationships with fathers probably has had an even bigger impact than that though. When you have mostly only communicated with women, how do you go about communicating with a man?

Blogger J Van Stry October 21, 2015 12:51 PM  

But to women it IS a crime to disagree. That is how they run their social circles, that is how they behave with their friends and lovers, their husbands and their children.

So they think they can do that in business and politics.

That's why when you disagree with the SJW's, and the left, they want to punish and silence you, because they're mostly women, and your disagreeing with them should be a crime.

Blogger Marie October 21, 2015 12:57 PM  

On my earlier comment, I think I should clarify.

I'm not trying to say women get a free pass on their behavior because of men.

I wanted to point out that men have a huge influence over the girls in their life and shape the women they become. Girls/women are watching you. When you reward the flighty, irrational, bitchy behavior even the good girls start to think they should behave that way.

At the end of the day most women want to be liked by men and don't want to be perceived as annoying. But they grow up and watch boys/men give them mixed messages because the guys are changing their tune because it helps get the guys what they want at the moment. Men are generally pretty good at manipulating women. Most women understand that even if they can't always see when they are being manipulated. That's why some women go a little psycho.

OpenID Jack Amok October 21, 2015 1:04 PM  

"I dont' think so. The issue isn't the tone. The issue is you taking a firm position to early in the consensus ritual."


This is my current headache. I have to get a bunch of Millennials bought into a project. What needs to be done is perfectly clear, but it takes hours of meetings to get them to nod yes to "the sky is blue." Unfortunately, unless I want to babysit the entire project, I can't skip this critical step.

Blogger Carl Philipp October 21, 2015 1:07 PM  

@45 I had a similar hiccup with:
"In all communication, the primary responsibility lies with the person talking, not the person being addressed."

Then I remembered that all rhetoric and all advice must be interpreted situationally. When you are speaking with regular people who are capable and willing to have a rational discussion, it is your responsibility to present your argument as clearly and persuasively as you can. When you are speaking with SJWs, it is your responsibility to recognize that honest debate is impossible and use anti-SJW measures instead. Anti-SJW tactics are completely inappropriate in a sane and sensible meeting, and vice versa.

Blogger James Higham October 21, 2015 1:22 PM  

Compounding the problem is that the natural solipsism of women combines with that lack of self-confidence so they make it all about themselves.

Sort of thing I might have said. :)

Blogger Daniel October 21, 2015 1:28 PM  

@86 I feel that. For the first few years in the workforce, I just thought it was immaturity and general young-people directionlessness and misunderstanding.

Nope. They are on average considerably slow to adapt to projects, and have a high tolerance for stupidity.A high number of them have fireproof asses, too. There's no lighting a fire under them. There have always been workers with no pride in their work; the Mills make it a virtue.

This is why I appreciate the outlier Mill even more. He's got peer pressure to be a witless stripling.

Blogger IM2L844 October 21, 2015 1:40 PM  

Funny. Just last night, I told a woman that I thought she was "full of shit". She took offense. It was a short conversation.

Blogger Student in Blue October 21, 2015 1:42 PM  

@Marie
Men are generally pretty good at manipulating women.

Um... no. The majority (Deltas and Gammas) try to do whatever the woman says, because you got to make her happy. That's how we were raised, and that's what culture keeps saying.

There's plenty of blame to go around, darling.

Blogger Alexander October 21, 2015 1:48 PM  

@91

You have to remember that with women, half of what's being said is unspoken.

Men [that I notice] are pretty good at manipulating women.

Blogger David-2 October 21, 2015 2:08 PM  

These comments are all on point. This phenomenon goes a long way towards explaining why those few women who actually become programmers/software developers quickly leave the field.

An engineer goes into an engineering meeting with a problem in mind and a strong desire to get to a viable solution. The technique used - the time-tested and only acceptable technique - is to propose solutions and shoot down the wrong, inadequate, or costly ones, until only one or two are left standing. And, becausing having a bunch of engineers in a room talking is expensive and delays the project, you do it as fast as possible.

This is seen as threatening by many women. Not to mention rude. And if you're not assertive, you don't get a chance to talk. Many women see this as that they're being deliberately ignored.

Sometimes - not always - one or more engineers may be really passionate about a particular idea - about whether it is right, or wrong. This is expressed by a certain emphasis in tones of voice, and in the words chosen. The emphasis is very very rarely directed at a human (except for management). It is mainly directed at ideas.

But many women misunderstand this.

The result of these meetings, if successful, is a consensus on a solution, and how to proceed. Generally, few people care whose ideas went into the final result. No matter how energetic the meeting the end is typically very collegial. Engineers still have good working relationships with each other. People get to work immediately and don't hang around rehashing every word, facial expression, things that were said vs. how they could have been said, etc. etc.

And this last fact is what drives women mad.

Blogger Red Jack October 21, 2015 2:10 PM  

@93 The women engineers who do well understand that. I have a new shiny hat engineer that is figuring that out. She is not as vocal or direct as I would like, but she doesn't cry at the end of the meeting and will wander into the fray.

Blogger Marie October 21, 2015 2:14 PM  

Student in Blue- I agree there is plenty of blame to go around. There are nasty, nasty women out there as well. My comment really wasn't about giving women a free pass but pointing out that men do (inadvertently) encourage behavior in women that they don't like. (Women do it too.)

Alexander- Ouch.

But you have a point.

Doing whatever a woman says? That will only get you a woman who gets off on controlling men or is too immature to realize that isn't a healthy relationship.

In my mind that is the male equivalent to our "put-out-and-he-will-love-you."

Blogger James Dixon October 21, 2015 2:29 PM  

> In a moment, even the women who know the score, who know the truth when it comes to politics, economics, feminism, Islam, etc., even those women who are so well-versed, can be bowled over and OWNED by their fears, insecurities, and emotions in an instant, ditching ALL their professed values and beliefs in a momentary scramble to save face or not "hurt" some person's feeeeeeelings.

I really wish that were only true of women. But it's a general human failing, not just for women. It's only more obvious with them.

> When I would explain to my wife that something she had said was not logical she would take it as a personal attack, as though I was saying she was bad or stupid.

Even my wife has that reaction some times, and she's known better for a long time.

Blogger SirHamster October 21, 2015 2:34 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger RobertT October 21, 2015 2:38 PM  

Assumptions kill.

Blogger SirHamster October 21, 2015 2:46 PM  

"I'm going to tell you... I'm going to tell you... I'm going to tell you...." It's actually a good Gamma tell.

Ran into this recently, and found it was true the hard way.

I requested he tell me ... and after a few back-and-forths, found out that he had no ability to tell me. Pissed me off because he was wasting my time breaking unnecessary promises.

Blogger Gaiseric October 21, 2015 2:49 PM  

@85 I wanted to point out that men have a huge influence over the girls in their life and shape the women they become. Girls/women are watching you. When you reward the flighty, irrational, bitchy behavior even the good girls start to think they should behave that way.

Which is a good point. And requires situational awareness. Not all women are the same and not all women respond to things the same, and not all women have the same claim on your good opinion.

My 17-yo daughter is fairly blunt, outspoken and resilient when it comes to this kind of thing, and I think my "style" has worn off on her to her benefit. My wife has a tendency towards almost clinical anxiety disorder. For her, I have to keep in mind that when she's irritable or "difficult" that it's the anxiety speaking and that I can relatively easily calm her down (assuming I remember not to get irritated back) and then have a rational discussion with her once we've overcome the initial spike of anxiety.

For just some random woman, I don't care very much. I don't care if their feelings are hurt. I don't care if they can't ever muster the ability to speak to me again, etc. If I "break" them by hurting their poor little feelings, that's their problem.

Not that I go out of my way to do so, but the point is, I have to deal differently with my wife, my daughter, my mother and my sister, and I don't treat any of them the way I would any other woman I might come across.

Men are generally pretty good at manipulating women. Most women understand that even if they can't always see when they are being manipulated. That's why some women go a little psycho.

No, they're not. It's not hard for them to manipulate most women in theory, but it doesn't come naturally to men, and many men—most men, even?—never really understand it or get the hang of it.

Blogger Groot October 21, 2015 2:53 PM  

What a bunch of spergs. Women are so ridiculously easy to manipulate that it can be enormous fun. If you do it right, they think so, too. An example: Somehow, the talk veered off into womanese, so I piped up with something cute about my dog, completely off-topic. They burst out laughing at how off-topic it was. I said, "I was feeling left out." Now I've said something cute, I have their womanly sympathy and they're laughing, but, most importantly, I have the floor again and the discussion goes back on track.

Blogger Red Jack October 21, 2015 2:55 PM  

@101 That is how we talk with the Sales team.

Then they wander away and we can get back to work. I don't have the time or resources to play those games, there is a plant to run.

Blogger Were-Puppy October 21, 2015 2:57 PM  

@26 Jourdan

I kept observing my nephew bringing home weird new phrases from college. One of my favorites would be if he asked me a question. Then after a response, he would say "I know, right?".

He would say that over and over for a couple of weeks, and finally I said, "If you know, then wth are you asking me for?"

He didn't use it again, to my knowledge :P

Blogger Rabbi B October 21, 2015 3:05 PM  

"Then after a response, he would say "I know, right?"."

Has to be one of the most annoying phrases on the planet these days.

Blogger chris October 21, 2015 3:09 PM  

Vox, one of the issues here is that self esteem is not a skill. Good rhetoric is a skill: you need to be able to change the manner and means of speaking for the audience -- akin to changing gears on a bike, and just as rapidly.

The content of your discourse does not change, but the delivery does. Because hurffeelings stop production, and sacking the petunias takes about three years where I live (New Zealand: don't go there).

If you are unskilled, you will give messges you don't want to give. The best training you can get is video training: see what you look like, and modify what you don't like.

I agree about the miseducation of the current generation. It is driven by a lack of rigor: the educationalists are looking at the proxy outcome of self esteem and not the harder to ascertain measure of competence.

Blogger Were-Puppy October 21, 2015 3:24 PM  

@77 Dave
"dispassionate discussion"

What man has ever said this?
---

Sounds like an Obomunism.

Blogger Were-Puppy October 21, 2015 3:25 PM  

Whoops, meant Obamanism :P

Blogger professorastro October 21, 2015 3:25 PM  

As I entered my classroom, I saw Lawrence's article copied on a sheet. It was read in the earlier sociology class. This garbage is what students are learning at institutions of higher learning now. Move over Plato!

Blogger Were-Puppy October 21, 2015 3:31 PM  

@87 Carl Philipp
@45 I had a similar hiccup with:
"In all communication, the primary responsibility lies with the person talking, not the person being addressed."

Then I remembered that all rhetoric and all advice must be interpreted situationally. When you are speaking with regular people who are capable and willing to have a rational discussion, it is your responsibility to present your argument as clearly and persuasively as you can. When you are speaking with SJWs, it is your responsibility to recognize that honest debate is impossible and use anti-SJW measures instead. Anti-SJW tactics are completely inappropriate in a sane and sensible meeting, and vice versa.
---

Oh but sometimes it's fun to slip a little rhetoric in where it doesn't belong. Once I was in an IT meeting with these out of town consultants from Boston. They kept mentioning to me I should consider going there to work. I was consulting at the time. At one point, I told them, "I'd like to entertain that idea, but if I moved up to Boston, i'd have to burn my boots for my feet would have touched Yankee soil." Their expressions were hilarious :P

Blogger pdwalker October 21, 2015 3:32 PM  

@104

Has to be one of the most annoying phrases on the planet these days.

I know, right?

(AUGH! I've yet to break my oldest of that annoying verbal tick - one thing at a time I guess)

Blogger pdwalker October 21, 2015 3:34 PM  

@75
Sometimes it's entertaining though, and I just let her go with a smirk on my face until she tunes in and catches herself.

It's become a game between my daughters an I. I'm just waiting for them to turn around and pull that on Mother.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 3:41 PM  

My comment really wasn't about giving women a free pass but pointing out that men do (inadvertently) encourage behavior in women that they don't like. (Women do it too.)

Yes, every discussion of a failing of women must include at least one digression into "men do it too" or "men are really the cause of it." That's the law.

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 3:42 PM  

I kept observing my nephew bringing home weird new phrases from college. One of my favorites would be if he asked me a question. Then after a response, he would say "I know, right?".

If you haven't figured it by now, this statement signals agreement in a conspiratorial way. Hippies used to say "Far out, man" in a similar fashion.

-Bitches...
-IKR

Blogger Were-Puppy October 21, 2015 3:42 PM  

@110 pdwalker
@104

Has to be one of the most annoying phrases on the planet these days.

I know, right?

(AUGH! I've yet to break my oldest of that annoying verbal tick - one thing at a time I guess)
----

It's like they've misinterpreted and screwed up an older saying " I know that's right!".

You can use some of these older phrases with funny results with these milenials:

"You don't know what I'm saying, you know what I'm saying?"

"You the man, dogg, i mean, you the dogg man"

etc

Blogger Rabbi B October 21, 2015 3:43 PM  

"If you haven't figured it by now, this statement signals agreement in a conspiratorial way. Hippies used to say "Far out, man" in a similar fashion."

It's all good, man.

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 3:45 PM  

I interpret the "right" to mean, "I know, and you know, and you know that I know, right?"

Blogger Were-Puppy October 21, 2015 3:46 PM  

@113 Markku

If you haven't figured it by now, this statement signals agreement in a conspiratorial way. Hippies used to say "Far out, man" in a similar fashion.
---

Yeah. This reminds me of another one I used to hear my dads friends say when I was a kid. If the question posed was an affirmative, they would say "does a bear shit in the woods?"

Blogger Alexander October 21, 2015 3:54 PM  

And we have now reached the point where a Finn is explaining the idiosyncrasies of English slang.

Markku, your certification papers are in the mail. Full marks.

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 3:55 PM  

I'm going to go brag to everyone that I'm certifiable.

Blogger Rabbi B October 21, 2015 3:57 PM  

"And we have now reached the point where a Finn is explaining the idiosyncrasies of English slang."

I know, right?

It's the gift that keeps on giving.

OpenID Steve October 21, 2015 3:58 PM  

Just remember you have a choice between loving women & understanding them. Once you understand them you cant go back-BGS

Who thinks that oratory like "I have a dream" ... shows up in a business meeting?

It sure seemed like it in a meeting about getting patient satisfaction numbers above respiratory, I pointed out it was not realistic because their job is to stop at peoples bedside and make them feel/breath better(with no clue of if they are late), we might as well plan on beating the woman that hands out lollipops at the front desk. Realism was not welcome.

Women are also more inclined than men to see criticism of an idea they have expressed as personal criticism and react angrily to it

You should see how they react to an infection control nurse or hospital safety officer. I remember one nurse that was investigated for being an angel of death was cleared said in a staff meeting afterwards "if there was anything I could do to save more people" I replied "what about not taking over an hours worth of smoke breaks a day".

GRRM: Don't worry! They're coming! Not just two pizzas, there's, there's gonna be five! And they're gonna be huge! You won't believe it! WIth extra roofies. Actually with GRRM if he ordered 5 pizzas what will the others eat?

teaching example where I'll give students bonus points for catching a mistake,,,I'll make sure to make a couple to break the ice

I remember my physiology teacher gave the entire class a point if someone found a mistake, I didn't think he did it on purpose. The only people that caught mistakes was one girl and I. The teacher said he would have suspected us of cheating if we didn't have a stupid girl sitting between us on tests.

Goddamnit, I never get invited to those meetings. Must be happening up on the executive floor

I don't know what kind of hookers Nate buys, but I have seen some pretty skanky things I couldn't believe anyone would pay for.

How about Hell is a real place and people actually go there." ..Silence. Well, so, about the HSA plan this year

A lot of leftists think it will be great because of all the party people there.

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 4:06 PM  

I know, right?

It's the gift that keeps on giving.


Can’t even right now.

Blogger Rabbi B October 21, 2015 4:09 PM  

Can’t even right now.

Well I, never . . . .

Blogger Marie October 21, 2015 4:15 PM  

@100 Gaiseric

Completely agreed. I don't expect you to babysit some stranger's feelings.


"No, they're not. It's not hard for them to manipulate most women in theory, but it doesn't come naturally to men, and many men—most men, even?—never really understand it or get the hang of it."

This might be a naive viewpoint, I don't think most men understand it or get the hang of it because they have no desire to do so. They are good men and/or see no need for it.

I would argue most, if not all, of the men posting here have demonstrated sufficient intelligence and could easily learn to manipulate people if they wanted to do so. That most men _don't_ I think speaks more to their character than their capabilities.

When I said "men are pretty good at manipulating women" I wasn't counting the men who don't try to manipulate them. Most men I see who try to manipulate women tend to succeed. And succeed with stupid stuff that really shouldn't work.

I guess I was just assuming you guys are perfectly capable of manipulation if you choose to do so. I figured lots of guys didn't do it because they see no need for it or think it is way too much work for little pay off.

Blogger Groot October 21, 2015 4:17 PM  

@112. Cail Corishev:
"Yes, every discussion of a failing of women must include at least one digression into 'men do it too' or 'men are really the cause of it.'"

Their obsession with you is your source of strength, not weakness. This is easy to leverage. They're generally eager for approval. Unless... Oh..

Blogger Student in Blue October 21, 2015 4:17 PM  

@Groot

You're not most people. That distinction was rather the point.

@Marie

I understand what you're trying to say and I appreciate it, but it's simply not true that men as a whole are good at manipulating women. Affecting them, absolutely. Some men being good at manipulation, absolutely. But there's a very large number of average, dumpy men who are not.

Doing whatever a woman says? That will only get you a woman who gets off on controlling men or is too immature to realize that isn't a healthy relationship.

It still happens though. It's very sad, and there's a bunch of unhappy men and women in relationships because of it nowadays.

Blogger Gaiseric October 21, 2015 4:18 PM  

@124 Well, as you say, it's not hard, if you have the discipline to do it. All it takes is a few days of reading Heartiste, and you're good to go.

Blogger Student in Blue October 21, 2015 4:21 PM  

@Marie
I figured lots of guys didn't do it because they see no need for it or think it is way too much work for little pay off.

Lots of guys rather believe that women are some inscrutable, impossible mystery. They believe it's impossible to manipulate them, unless you're outright lying.

Blogger Groot October 21, 2015 4:22 PM  

@124. Marie:

You're apologizing. A lot.

Blogger Dave October 21, 2015 4:38 PM  

You are Groot

I know, right?

Blogger Marie October 21, 2015 4:40 PM  

@129 Groot

I never apologized.

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 4:54 PM  

This ALWAYS happens. Always. *eyetwitch*

Person A refers to this definition:

Definition of APOLOGIA
: a defense especially of one's opinions, position, or actions

And person B responds as if the definition were this:

apology
noun apol·o·gy \ə-ˈpä-lə-jē\

: a statement saying that you are sorry about something : an expression of regret for having done or said something wrong

Blogger Marie October 21, 2015 5:09 PM  

Fair enough.

Mr. Goot, I apologize for misunderstanding you.

Blogger Marie October 21, 2015 5:11 PM  

Mr. Goot,

Touche.

Blogger Sevron October 21, 2015 5:24 PM  

Does the required consensus thing apply to all women all the time, or does it wax and wain depending on culture? I was at a party once of almost all Chinese people, a feature of which is the men and women usually segregate at the party, or all the men sit on this side of the table and all the women on that side. So when one couple arrived, his wife pealed off to talk to the girls, and one other girl immediately said "You look like you have gained 3 pounds!"

It's notable that she did so in English, at an event where only 2 of us couldn't speak Mandarin, and at a volume where the men could hear it. And the girl just laughed a little and said something along the lines of "I have gained about that, I need to lose weight."

I've seen other examples of direct real-talk between Chinese women that I don't think would ever fly here. They're still women- the hamster, the solypsism, and so on- but they do a lot more direct communication than I hear from Western women.

Blogger Groot October 21, 2015 5:34 PM  

@134. Marie:

I'm just funnin' with you. I so saw that coming, though. Heh.

@126. Student in Blue:
"You're not most people."

I know what you're implying:

I am Moot.

Blogger LP999/S.I.G. Burnin' Up! October 21, 2015 6:38 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Carl Philipp October 21, 2015 7:18 PM  

@124 Marie
To apply the lesson of this post, and stop "apologizing," delete the following statements:

1) This might be a naive viewpoint, I don't think most men...
2) I would argue most, if not all, of the men posting here...
3) That most men _don't_ I think speaks more...
4) I guess I was just assuming you guys are perfectly capable...
5) I figured lots of guys didn't do it because...

For starters.

Unrelatedly, does anybody know the tag for strikethrough if Blogger uses one? s and strike are both invalid.

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 7:22 PM  

That's qualifying. When people accuse of "apologizing" for some point of view, and they use the word properly, what they are saying is that what on the surface might look like an objective and neutral treatise on a topic, is actually just a one-sided defense of a particular viewpoint.

If that was the intent all along, then there is nothing wrong with making an apologia for something.

Blogger Groot October 21, 2015 7:26 PM  

@138. Carl Philipp:

I̶t̶'̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶p̶o̶s̶s̶i̶b̶l̶e̶.̶ It can't be done.

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 7:31 PM  

You write S̶t̶r̶i̶k̶e̶t̶h̶o̶r̶u̶g̶h̶ with tools such as these.

It's a bit of a hack though, utilizing rarely used Unicode characters, so it might show wrong (possibly completely unreadable) on mobile devices.

Blogger Marie October 21, 2015 7:37 PM  

@ 136.

It was a good move. You got me fair and square.

@138

Got it. I will do that next time I pop into the conversation here. Verbal tics can be distracting.

Blogger Julie Dyal October 21, 2015 7:49 PM  

@124 I guess I was just assuming you guys are perfectly capable of manipulation if you choose to do so. I figured lots of guys didn't do it because they see no need for it or think it is way too much work for little pay off.

Manipulation isn't necessarily sinister. My wife has, in the past, literally begged me to manipulate her emotionally. She would readily admit that her emotions, particularly anxiety, were beyond her ability to control, but that I could do so easily.

Problem was, for quite some time, I was just irritated that her emotions were so on the surface all of the time. It took me understanding that that's just how it was going to be and it couldn't be helped, and at that point, I found that manipulating her was easy. She knows I do it, and she's happier for it.

But that's part of why I say that men don't necessarily take naturally to it. What men take naturally to is straight talking and not letting your emotions have so much control over you. There's a reason that so many modern men are so often compared to women—because they've been indoctrinated to abandon that time-honored and evo-psych proven masculine personality trait, or at least to suborn it and treat it as a flaw rather than a strength.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 21, 2015 7:49 PM  

In the olden days, we did deletion/strikethrough like this:

She's a bit^H^H^Hlovely human being.

( ^H was the backspace character, but because of differences in keyboards and terminals, sometimes it would come through verbatim, so you'd pretend it was accidental.)

Blogger Were-Puppy October 21, 2015 7:50 PM  

@130 Dave
You are Groot

I know, right?

I know that's right!

Blogger Gaiseric October 21, 2015 7:51 PM  

And apparently I'm posting as my wife. Freakin' cookies when I change computers.

Blogger Were-Puppy October 21, 2015 7:58 PM  

I was curious about a guy named Julie.

Blogger Carl Philipp October 21, 2015 8:02 PM  

@147 The fact that you assumed it was a guy from the word "wife" just proves that you hate lesbians. Give me a sec while I track down your personal information. I think your employer needs to know about this.

Blogger Groot October 21, 2015 8:15 PM  

@141. Markku:

.sdrowkcab ti tog ev'uoY

Blogger Markku October 21, 2015 8:19 PM  

?os woH

Blogger Groot October 21, 2015 8:26 PM  

I ɯǝɐuʇ' ʎon,ʌǝ ƃoʇ ᴉʇ ndsᴉpǝ poʍu˙

Blogger Gaiseric October 21, 2015 8:50 PM  

I was curious about a guy named Julie.

Short for Julius. As in Caesar.

Blogger Forrest Bishop October 21, 2015 10:16 PM  

@151. Groot

I ɯǝɐuʇ' ʎon,ʌǝ ƃoʇ ᴉʇ ndsᴉpǝ poʍu˙

The geek is strong in this one.

Blogger bob k. mando October 21, 2015 11:16 PM  

104. Rabbi B October 21, 2015 3:05 PM
Has to be one of the most annoying phrases on the planet these days.



I know, right?


anyways, ArsTech figures out that if you teach toddlers to behave in a manipulative and deceitful manner

...

they become manipulative and deceitful.

hurr durr.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/10/training-children-to-think-of-others-helps-them-lie/

Blogger Dirk Manly October 22, 2015 7:12 PM  

"'Has to be one of the most annoying phrases on the planet these days.'

I know, right?

(AUGH! I've yet to break my oldest of that annoying verbal tick - one thing at a time I guess)"


My response to "I know, right?" is simple -- to take offense at the insult contained within:

"Uhhhhhh..... why are you first agreeing with me, and then you follow up immediately by insulting me by trying to claim credit for my idea?"

When they do it a couple minutes later, "There you go again...."

Basically, I become just as annoying with my response as the whole "I know, right?" is until their level of annoyance gets high enough that they stop using it around me.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts