ysabetwordsmith (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ysabetwordsmith) wrote2012-03-19 12:14 am
ysabetwordsmith) wrote2012-03-19 12:14 am
Entry tags:
A Gentleman Online
Etiquette guides fascinate me, although I pick and choose manners in a way that few cultures ever approve of. Or use them as boxes of spare parts to build interesting new cultures. In general, I find that guides for gentlemen are far more useful than guides for ladies. So here's one for how to be a gentleman online. Most of the advice is quite good.
Interestingly, I find it far easier to be polite online than in person, because I don't have people right in my face, and I can just ignore them I feel like they're wasting my time. I can be myself online, in ways that are sometimes feasible in person and sometimes not.
As for being rude -- well, sometimes the most honorable thing to do is call a man a coward to his face when that's how he's acting. Be polite, but don't impersonate a doormat. If your honest opinion is rude, lying about it is hardly any nicer than voicing it.
Because there are a great many things that need to be said and done, that could get someone fired for saying even outside their job, which is legal but not acceptable. Online anonymity is a necessary precaution for many people and topics, so ignore this rule. Just don't use anonymity as an excuse for acting like a jerk. You are still responsible to yourself even if nobody else knows who you are.
The thing about being a gentleman is this: It doesn't matter what other people think of you. It matters whether you live up to your own expectations of being a decent, responsible human being.
Certainly the loss of empathy from interacting as anonymous, disembodied selves is a major factor. But the real root of the problem is how we view our time online; many see it as a break from their “real lives”—a place where they can let it all hang out. In their off-line lives they must be civil and refrain from telling their boss how they really feel about him, yelling at the customer service rep who’s giving them the runaround, and getting out of the car and punching the rude and reckless driver in front of them.
Interestingly, I find it far easier to be polite online than in person, because I don't have people right in my face, and I can just ignore them I feel like they're wasting my time. I can be myself online, in ways that are sometimes feasible in person and sometimes not.
As for being rude -- well, sometimes the most honorable thing to do is call a man a coward to his face when that's how he's acting. Be polite, but don't impersonate a doormat. If your honest opinion is rude, lying about it is hardly any nicer than voicing it.
This is simple: if you’re not proud enough of something to have it associated with your real name, then why are you writing it?
Because there are a great many things that need to be said and done, that could get someone fired for saying even outside their job, which is legal but not acceptable. Online anonymity is a necessary precaution for many people and topics, so ignore this rule. Just don't use anonymity as an excuse for acting like a jerk. You are still responsible to yourself even if nobody else knows who you are.
The thing about being a gentleman is this: It doesn't matter what other people think of you. It matters whether you live up to your own expectations of being a decent, responsible human being.
no subject
no subject
In general, though, this reminds me of one of my favorite Heinlein quotes: "Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naïve, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best."
no subject
An important point I was taught as a child: a gentleman never gives unintentional offense.
Yes...
Thoughts
That makes sense.
>> "Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naïve, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best." <<
The thing is, dishonesty -- even the "etiquette" variety -- functions as sand in the gears. More for some people than others.
When I was little, I looked at this stack of datapoints:
* "Do not lie. Lying is immoral and causes problems."
* "Honesty is a virtue and people value it."
* BUT telling the truth often causes people to go ballistic. Despite what they say, people actually hate honesty. It forces them to acknowledge things they are desperately trying to ignore.
* AND lying is demanded, sometimes by force, over points of "politeness."
So I said, fuck it. I won't play by those rules. Those rules are insane. I will not play crazy mind games with crazy people who say one thing, do another, and blame everyone else for the mess that is obviously going to result from this communication clusterfuck. You want that, you will have to do it without my help.
I learned to decide whether or not to share my opinions based on safety, sanity, and risk/benefit assessment. I learned to think about phrasing, because it's possible to be honest without being sadistic about it. But I will neither give nor accept a dishonest apology, nor participate in a great many other social falsehoods, and in my observation, inaccurate communication (even for the sake of politeness) causes far more problems than it solves. They just tend to be subtle rather than overt, delayed rather than immediate, chronic rather than acute. And much harder to fix because you can barely tell what's gone wrong or talk about how.
Ultimately I summed it up like this: "A lie may be your ally, but it will never be your friend."
Re: Thoughts
I'm with you on the dishonest part of politeness; I've got no time for that. But this also can be applied to how a given honest remark is made. There's a world of difference between saying "I disagree with your statement, and here are some data points to support why" and saying "You're wrong, you're an idiot, and you're also [insert slur here]."*
*Probably either in all caps or none :P
no subject
Like you, I find it much easier to be myself online. My personality comes across far more clearly in text (and pictures!) than in person — to the point that I'm not sure my real self even exists in physical space.
I also disagree with the implication that real (by which I assume he means legal) names are necessarily more valid than the names we choose for ourselves.
Thoughts
Most humans seem to detect others' emotional state through body language and voice tone. But there are other ways to do it, equally valid.
As for the other? Most people make the mistake of thinking that they are their bodies. I think it comes of not remembering anything else, and putting a whole lot of emphasis on physical appearance and performance. Being meta and focused more on soul than body is going to make you stick out in all kinds of ways.
>>It's hard to be empathetic when I'm being bombarded by sensory input, but I have no problem empathizing with people (even fictional ones!) when I read about their experiences. I also think that reading what other people have to say makes it more likely that you will understand their feelings rather than guessing from the outside and projecting your own.<<
Yes. Input can get overwhelming. It's hard to spare the energy to be polite or work on problem-solving when someone's raining all over you, and not everybody can shield it out. Or worse, they're lying about how they feel and then get upset when you take their words at face value, which falls into the category of shit up with which I will not put. Having a statement of emotional condition is very convenient.
>>Like you, I find it much easier to be myself online. My personality comes across far more clearly in text (and pictures!) than in person — to the point that I'm not sure my real self even exists in physical space.<<
Well ... maybe the important parts of you just don't fit into the dimension that contains meat. A lot of mine don't, and I know other folks for whom that's true. You still know what you are, so you can describe it easily enough; but someone looking for it won't see it because that isn't where it's at.
>>I also disagree with the implication that real (by which I assume he means legal) names are necessarily more valid than the names we choose for ourselves.<<
Yeah, this culture has weird ideas about names. At least now people have widespread social options for choosing their own use-names. That's not even two decades old yet.
no subject
This had utterly no relevance to my life, of course! but at the time, it was pretty close to sf/f for me... and was a delightfully ordered and comprehensible world.
Re: Thoughts
My mother was vicious, and justified it by its "honesty". But- it really wasn't honest- it didn't consider all sides, for example- it was just nasty and mean-spirited. For the 25+ years we've been estranged, she's prided herself on that being due to her unwillingness to not be "honest"; I say it's because i required that she keep a civil tongue in her head, which she explicitly declined to do. Honest, indeed. I still remember when she insisted on visiting when we did not have a habitable house, and my daughter was a newborn... and rather than HELPING, she sat on her ass, demanded services, and verbally abused me for not having a comfy house and waiting on her enough- oh, and for being FAT.
Thus, I see the downside of "honesty"- though I know, from reading you online, that's not what you mean by it.
She is still convinced that she's the Truth-teller (gods know, I wouldn't notice that I am FAT unless she attacked me with it regularly!). I'm convinced- based on that an a lot of previous crap- that she's a manipulative, nasty bitch who is well out of my life.
Honesty is 2-edged, and can be used for cruelty just as easily as it can be used for good, in my experience.
no subject
Re: Thoughts
It is worth considering, before saying anything, whether it needs to be said. Some truths, if kept secret or distorted, can do terrible damage. Others will do more harm than good if let loose. It is not always easy to tell the difference, but it is important. Then too, some people can't talk about some things; they lock up. So allowance has to made for that as well.
In dealing with unpleasant truths, the best one can do is try to minimize the damage. Honesty should not be an excuse for hurting people needlessly, any more than politeness should be an excuse for lying.
Re: Thoughts
At this point I'm rather of the opinion that if it's 2 out of 3, it may need to be said... but not cruelly.