The Forum > General Discussion > Dead, Dying, or even desirable?
Dead, Dying, or even desirable?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
- 6
- 7
-
- All
Posted by CJ Morgan, Friday, 12 June 2009 9:52:41 AM
| |
2500 years ago Socrates complained about the death of manners in the children. What he doesn't go into is the actual ages of the children.
Some people never seem to mature in some areas. I would submit related issues into the mix with the usual caveat. (*Most of the conclusions below are "In my opinion and observations" ONLY and not necessarily shared by others*.) First what are manners? I think it is reasonable to assume they are the expression of cultural/societal personal behavioural norms (norms= 1 std dev either side of the average/mean [approx 66% of the population]). the logical corollary is The further one gets from those accepted norms the more disapproval/opposition the individual receives. Secondly examinator's law(well borrowed anyway, ok appropriated) "The only constant is change". Therefore what are perceived as manners are constantly changing. Change is resisted increasingly in relation to its relationship to the 'norm' third examinator's theory on contextual acceptability. As per the first point, "behaviour is only acceptable if it meets with 66%(1 std dev) of the CURRENT audience." (group dynamics?) Therefore a persons style of arguing/attitudes may be acceptable in other specific niche areas but it could/should be argued that on this site, topic the wider (dealing with strangers) norm applies. Re my opening it is a function of the pre-maturity to be selfish and 'in your face, I am right no need for logic or facts'. Tragically this does not necessarily correlate with age. PS "examinator's laws et al" are intended as tongue in cheek. ;-) Posted by examinator, Friday, 12 June 2009 11:22:46 AM
| |
Courtesy is just rational behaviour.
For example, people need to be allowed space to exit a place, eg, public transport before others can enter - this is in line with the basic law of physics that two solid objects cannot share the same time and space (not getting into quantum physics here). So WTF is it with people who cannot step aside so that others can exit, thus clearing space for those who want entry? It is not specific to gender, race or creed; there are morons who seem to think they can board a train by physically walking though others. My question is this, being a normally mild mannered type, do I have the right to kick a few shins or would this only exacerbate the problem? Due to a very bad back ATM I am not as nimble at avoiding these idiots but still have strong legs and can recall my Tae Kwon Do days. Any suggestions? Posted by Fractelle, Friday, 12 June 2009 12:12:09 PM
| |
CJ Morgan, I don't buy your naive country bumpkin analogy.
the well mannered, clean cut younger country bloke you mention might have had a dozen agendas. he may have just murdered someone, or just escaped from Goulburn Supermax and was using manners to avoid bringing himself under suspicion. he might be on parole and any complaint against him of impropriety might send him straight back to the slammer. his uncle might know someone who's got a hundred million dollars tied up in a Nigerian bank and he's looking to groom a big, bearded middle-aged mark to reveal credit card details next time you meet. or he may been genuinely wanting to assist a more senior person out of compassion. you don't know what his agenda was apart from entering the door. you don't even seem to know what your own agenda was apart from exiting the door. human interraction is a tad more complex than the engagement of one-dimensional agendas, or no agendas whatsoever, just automatons passing in the night, as Maximillion posits. did you check whether he picked your pockets on your way out as you relaxed into his well-mannered embrace? as you know it is considered good manners to wear a mask if you have the flu to prevent the spread of disease. not shaking hands during a global pandemic is reverse manners, where politeness to prevent disease overrides the politeness of a conventional greeting. i apologise if the example I gave seemed ambiguous. moreover, adopting the manners towards women applied to grease the wheels of mysogyny does not correlate with the use of the same manners once misogyny is eliminated with the provision of women's legislatures. mysogyny is best resolved with polite discussion between a women's caucus and a men's caucus hosted by the Senate and the House of Representatives to reach agreement to amend Australia's Constitution to provide for a women's legislature. it is unlikely that those who label the pursuit of equal rights between women and men as bizarre would be admitted. manners serve an agenda. Posted by whistler, Friday, 12 June 2009 12:53:50 PM
| |
Thought this might be of interest re: feminism and manners.
The idea is that manners were something conferred on middle and upper class white women; not on women generally. Manners were used as 'evidence' of women being inherently weak and thereby used as a rationale for denying women's rights. Sojourner Truth was a slave who rose to speak at a general meeting: 1851 "Wall, chilern, whar dar is so much racket dar must be somethin' out o' kilter. I tink dat 'twixt de ni_ggers of de Souf and de womin at de Norf, all talkin' 'bout rights, de white men will be in a fix pretty soon. But what's all dis here talkin' 'bout? Dat man ober dar say dat womin needs to be helped into carriages, and lifted ober ditches, and to hab de best place everywhar. Nobody eber helps me into carriages, or ober mud-puddles, or gibs me any best place!" And raising herself to her full height, and her voice to a pitch like rolling thunder, she asked. 'And ain't I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! (and she bared her right arm to the shoulder, showing her tremendous muscular power). I have ploughed, and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain't I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man--when I could get it--and bear de lash as well! And ain't I a woman? I have borne thirteen chilern, and seen 'em mos' all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother's grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain't I a woman? "Den dey talks 'bout dis ting in de head; what dis dey call it?" ("Intellect," whispered some one near.) "Dat's it, honey. What's dat got to do wid womin's rights or ni_gger's rights? cont'd Posted by Pynchme, Friday, 12 June 2009 1:16:33 PM
| |
Sojourner Truth's speech cont'd:
If my cup won't hold but a pint, and yourn holds a quart, wouldn't ye be mean not to let me have my little half-measure full?" And she pointed her significant finger, and sent a keen glance at the minister who had made the argument. The cheering was long and loud. "Den dat little man in black dar, he say women can't have as much rights as men, 'cause Christ wan't a woman! Whar did your Christ come from?" Rolling thunder couldn't have stilled that crowd, as did those deep, wonderful tones, as she stood there with out-stretched arms and eyes of fire. Raising her voice still louder, she repeated, "Whar did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothin' to do wid Him." Oh, what a rebuke that was to that little man. Turning again to another objector, she took up the defense of Mother Eve. I can not follow her through it all. It was pointed, and witty, and solemn; eliciting at almost every sentence deafening applause; and she ended by asserting: "If de fust woman God ever made was strong enough to turn de world upside down all alone, dese women togedder (and she glanced her eye over the platform) ought to be able to turn it back, and get it right side up again! And now dey is asking to do it, de men better let 'em." Long-continued cheering greeted this. "'Bleeged to ye for hearin' on me, and now ole Sojourner han't got nothin' more to say." http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/sojtruth2.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sojourner_Truth I do the same as CJ, Fractelle and others have described; whoever gets to the door first holds it open for others; the one passing through says, "thanks". Posted by Pynchme, Friday, 12 June 2009 1:20:39 PM
|
I thought you said that manners can prevent disease, rather than spread it. Indeed, poor hygiene combined with activities like shaking hands can spread any number of diseases, and not just at airports.
Also, I suspect that if someone harbours misogynist sentiments, it might take slightly more than a "mannered discussion" to resolve their problem.