![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 25. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by TexasChic on June 21, 2006, at 18:02:13
In reply to Please be civil » Michael83, posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 20:49:26
> Most people have weak intellect.
Could he have said 'alot of people'? I don't want to go to admin with this simple question, I'm just kind of asking in general to try to understand. If I'm in the wrong, feel free to let me know.
I just don't see how this is different from saying 'people suck', which I believe I've said before. Maybe I just got off lucky.
Thanks!
-T
Posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 18:02:16
In reply to Re: Please be civil » gardenergirl, posted by TexasChic on June 20, 2006, at 21:02:27
If you were to be considered one of those "most people" or even among the "a lot of people" with a "weak intellect", how might you feel?
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 18:02:16
In reply to Re: Please be civil » TexasChic, posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 21:44:32
I didn't mean to make it appear that I was asking you to be civil.
gg
Posted by TexasChic on June 21, 2006, at 18:02:17
In reply to Re: Please be civil » gardenergirl, posted by TexasChic on June 20, 2006, at 21:02:27
Oooo, that looks like you're telling me to be civil! ;-) [Thinks a minute] You're not really telling me to be civil are you?
> If you were to be considered one of those "most people" or even among the "a lot of people" with a "weak intellect", how might you feel?
Yeah, but he also said;
...most of you reading this are better than that. One thing about people like us is that we reflect. Really reflect. Something most people don't do. I think that gives us something most people never get.And this:
...look at some people, and they're just blind to the world. Uptight people. Rude people. Brainless housewives lost in their own worlds tooling around town in their minivans. Testosterone overdosed jerks in pickups going about their drone-like lives.Surely no one would get offended because they consider themselves one of the uptight, rude, brainless people?
I kind of understand why you PBC'd Michael, like I said, its very easy to misconstrue in this environment. I however, read it as his way of trying to say that we, people dealing with 'mental illness' (I sure would like another term for that), are not beneath others. In fact, our introspective, obsessive nature may even make us more aware of other people's feelings.
Could this possibly be one of those 'reword situations' to let the poster know his comments might be misunderstood?
I don't know, I'm just speculating, not trying to question. I just figure we all have to work together if we want this place to work, so I'm throwing in my two cents on post interpretation. I don't even begin to claim that I know, well, pretty much anything. ;-)
Sorry, its way past my bedtime. I have to go for tonight. Talk to yall later.
-T
Posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 18:02:17
In reply to Re: Please be civil » TexasChic, posted by TexasChic on June 20, 2006, at 22:18:36
I guess I'm just troubled, because I can't see how anyone can really know these things about others. They're inferences at best. No one really knows what's in another's heart, mind, or soul.
> Surely no one would get offended because they consider themselves one of the uptight, rude, brainless people?
They might feel offended if they thought they were being labelled as such. Many labels have derogatory or otherwise critical views embedded in them. That doesn't make the labels themselves wrong, but applying them to another group can lead that group to feel put down or offended. And even "uptight, brainless, rude" people, whoever they might be have feelings, don't they? I ask again, if you thought you were being labelled as such, how would you feel?
>
> I kind of understand why you PBC'd Michael, like I said, its very easy to misconstrue in this environment. I however, read it as his way of trying to say that we, people dealing with 'mental illness' (I sure would like another term for that), are not beneath others. In fact, our introspective, obsessive nature may even make us more aware of other people's feelings.I like how you said that. It's a positive message that does not contain negatives about others.
>
> Could this possibly be one of those 'reword situations' to let the poster know his comments might be misunderstood?I suppose it could be, but actually Dr. Bob considers a "please rephrase" as more serious than a PBC, since it requires an action on the poster's part.
>
> I don't know, I'm just speculating, not trying to question. I just figure we all have to work together if we want this place to work, so I'm throwing in my two cents on post interpretation. I don't even begin to claim that I know, well, pretty much anything. ;-)I appreciate your thoughts.
>
> Sorry, its way past my bedtime. I have to go for tonight. Talk to yall later.Hope you slept well.
gg
Posted by Declan on June 21, 2006, at 18:07:09
In reply to Re: Please be civil » gardenergirl, posted by TexasChic on June 20, 2006, at 21:02:27
It's true enough...like, I don't take it as an insult. I have a weak intellect. Maybe I suck too.
Declan
Posted by Declan on June 21, 2006, at 18:10:24
In reply to Re: Please be civil » TexasChic, posted by Declan on June 21, 2006, at 18:07:09
Does this mean that I have low self esteem?
Posted by greywolf on June 21, 2006, at 19:40:19
In reply to Re: Please be civil » TexasChic, posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 21:44:32
Ha! That's what "PBC" means! I figured it was something like "Pre-Block Counseling."
Posted by Phillipa on June 21, 2006, at 19:59:08
In reply to Re: Please be civil, posted by greywolf on June 21, 2006, at 19:40:19
I don't care what people think about me. I'm me. And if they don't like it that's there problem not mine. I avoid them. Who needs them anyway. That's my feelings on life. Phillipa
Posted by Jakeman on June 21, 2006, at 23:22:02
In reply to Re: Please be civil » TexasChic, posted by TexasChic on June 20, 2006, at 22:18:36
We all gotta be nice here. Don't truly express yourself but be nice.
warm regards, Jake
Posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 0:56:18
In reply to Re: Please be civil » TexasChic, posted by Jakeman on June 21, 2006, at 23:22:02
> We all gotta be nice here. Don't truly express yourself but be nice.
Unless what we truly want to express is a put-down, we certainly can truly express ourselves. We have every freedom to do that up to and until it puts down someone else or in some other way is not sensitive to others' beliefs, values, and/or feelings.
I have to admit, I just don't understand what's so confusing or objectionable about that. I've thought about it, and about all I can come up with is that maybe at times what someone really and truly desires to express, and they cannot in some way inhibit this desire, is to be insensitive, judgmental, cruel, superior, or in some other way uncivil. Maybe at times that is the real content/meaning of the message--the need to be negative. It's perfectly normal to have those thoughts, urges, and feelings. But to participate at Babble, we must inhibit them. Those are the operating conditions here. If the message I need to express does not fall within those operating conditions, it's likely best to convey that message elsewhere.
I don't get it. Should this really be a place where one can "truly express" whatever they wish?
Yes, our rights are limited here. That's established from the beginning. And yet we choose to register and to participate given these limitations.
It's truly a mystery to me why that beomes objectionable after a time. But then, I've been called an idealist and naive on more than one occasion and in more than one context, so maybe that's what's getting in my way. H*ll, I don't know.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 3:32:23
In reply to Expressing yourself truthfully, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 0:56:18
I'd like to clarify that my post above is not about any indivual blocking incident or all blocks or PBC's. It's about me not "getting" something about what the civility guidelines represent to some. I'm certain my musings could appear idealistic, naive, narrow, self-righteous or other similar adjectives. Or just dense, I don't know. But I don't get it, and I'd like to.
I'll try not to think out loud so much about this anymore.
gg
Posted by Toph on June 22, 2006, at 14:28:31
In reply to Expressing yourself truthfully, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 0:56:18
>
> I have to admit, I just don't understand what's so confusing or objectionable about that. I've thought about it, and about all I can come up with is that maybe at times what someone really and truly desires to express, and they cannot in some way inhibit this desire, is to be insensitive, judgmental, cruel, superior, or in some other way uncivil. Maybe at times that is the real content/meaning of the message--the need to be negative. It's perfectly normal to have those thoughts, urges, and feelings. But to participate at Babble, we must inhibit them. Those are the operating conditions here... >> I don't get it. Should this really be a place where one can "truly express" whatever they wish?
>What I don't get is why it appears the administration is unwilling to consider a scenario in which a negative comment is supportive. In my work confronting an addictive, abusive or dangerous person with their dysfunction is a necessary part of a supportive intervention. The other day a coworker commented to me that I don't always listen to my clients as patiently as I should. I gratefully took this negative assessment as constructive and supportive as I know she wants me to do the best work I can.
Maybe its safer to only allow positive comments. But I wouldn't say that its best.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 14:48:35
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » gardenergirl, posted by Toph on June 22, 2006, at 14:28:31
> The other day a coworker commented to me that I don't always listen to my clients as patiently as I should. I gratefully took this negative assessment as constructive and supportive as I know she wants me to do the best work I can.
Is it impossible to make a similar comment to another poster here in a way that meets the civility guidelines?
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 14:56:54
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » Toph, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 14:48:35
Not to be contrary, Toph. That's a good example, though.
gg
Posted by Jakeman on June 22, 2006, at 19:31:03
In reply to Expressing yourself truthfully, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 0:56:18
Gardengirl,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I agree with Toph's response below. Personally I am afraid to express anger or strong opinions on this board for fear of running afoul of the rules, EVEN when expressed in a civil manner. Using I statements, disclaimers, saying-- this is only my opinion, etc. don't seem to help.
warm regards, Jake
Posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 21:25:34
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » gardenergirl, posted by Jakeman on June 22, 2006, at 19:31:03
Well....saying "this is only my opinion" is not likely to be enough if the way someone expresses their opinion is not civil. Nor is adding a disclaimer. And using "I" statements is a very specific way of expressing oneself that does not, at least in my case, come naturally and effortlessly. So I agree, it can be much more difficult and/or "fraught with peril" than what I would call "normal everyday conversing".
And I admit that there are things that no matter how hard someone tries, it just isn't going to be acceptable to say. For example, saying "widely known person X whom a signficant proportion of folks may have voted for in the last election is a turd" is pretty much not going to be civil no matter how accurate it may or may not be. Similarly, I cannot say, "In my opinion, widely known person X etc." I cannot say, "I feel widely known person X, etc." because that is not a feeling, it's an opinion.
But it is possible to say something like, "I'm troubled by the deaths of 2500 US soldiers. I have not been able to find an explanation or reason for this that I can live with."
Does *my feeling* of being troubled by something in any way infringe upon anyone else's views or feelings? Does *my inability* to find something I can *feel comfortable with" mean that there are no explanations that could be acceptable or that if others are not troubled by what I am troubled by that I think that's bad in some way?
I think that a key element to this is that posting an opinion seems much more likely to be something that others could feel hurt or put down by, but posting a feeling is really not something that anyone can realistically take on themselves.
That said, I do not for one moment discount feeling fearful about posting. It can be quite fraught with potential peril, even if posting about something one considers pretty inane, such as, oh I don't know, f*rting.
I suppose my earnestness about this issue is a lot about trying to suggest that perhaps there is more freedom in posting than might be apparent if one can adapt the message to appropriate "I" statements and so on. But then, that earnestness and desire to help is most likely one of my own little "near-pathologies" in that it could very well be much more about me than about anyone I might be trying to help.
And boy am I disclosing a lot of what's going on in my head lately.
gg
Posted by Jakeman on June 22, 2006, at 21:53:58
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » Jakeman, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 21:25:34
Gardengirl,
All of your points are well taken and appreciated. And I appreciate your sharing what's going on in your head. In my head, I am gun shy about posting. Sometimes if I feel strongly about a subject I'll go ahead and post while fearing a block. I'm simple minded and like to have rules clearly spelled out. I think too often posters get stuck in the quick-sand of unclear rules. I could be that Dr. Bob planned it this way so to give him more decision power. I don't know. Right now I need to back off because it's just too much hassle.
warm regards, Jake
> Well....saying "this is only my opinion" is not likely to be enough if the way someone expresses their opinion is not civil. Nor is adding a disclaimer. And using "I" statements is a very specific way of expressing oneself that does not, at least in my case, come naturally and effortlessly. So I agree, it can be much more difficult and/or "fraught with peril" than what I would call "normal everyday conversing".
>
> And I admit that there are things that no matter how hard someone tries, it just isn't going to be acceptable to say. For example, saying "widely known person X whom a signficant proportion of folks may have voted for in the last election is a turd" is pretty much not going to be civil no matter how accurate it may or may not be. Similarly, I cannot say, "In my opinion, widely known person X etc." I cannot say, "I feel widely known person X, etc." because that is not a feeling, it's an opinion.
>
> But it is possible to say something like, "I'm troubled by the deaths of 2500 US soldiers. I have not been able to find an explanation or reason for this that I can live with."
>
> Does *my feeling* of being troubled by something in any way infringe upon anyone else's views or feelings? Does *my inability* to find something I can *feel comfortable with" mean that there are no explanations that could be acceptable or that if others are not troubled by what I am troubled by that I think that's bad in some way?
>
> I think that a key element to this is that posting an opinion seems much more likely to be something that others could feel hurt or put down by, but posting a feeling is really not something that anyone can realistically take on themselves.
>
> That said, I do not for one moment discount feeling fearful about posting. It can be quite fraught with potential peril, even if posting about something one considers pretty inane, such as, oh I don't know, f*rting.
>
> I suppose my earnestness about this issue is a lot about trying to suggest that perhaps there is more freedom in posting than might be apparent if one can adapt the message to appropriate "I" statements and so on. But then, that earnestness and desire to help is most likely one of my own little "near-pathologies" in that it could very well be much more about me than about anyone I might be trying to help.
>
> And boy am I disclosing a lot of what's going on in my head lately.
>
> gg
Posted by muffled on June 23, 2006, at 0:39:12
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » Jakeman, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 21:25:34
But GG, I got blocked for saying the word f*rt.
My kids say f*rt.
;-)
Oh well!
You got good things to say GG.
Muffled
Posted by AuntieMel on June 23, 2006, at 9:33:24
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » gardenergirl, posted by muffled on June 23, 2006, at 0:39:12
And GG got a PBC for saying that particular "f" word - in code. Which is why she chose that example, I'm sure.
Posted by ron1953 on June 23, 2006, at 12:49:03
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » muffled, posted by AuntieMel on June 23, 2006, at 9:33:24
Unless one is quoting from an encyclopedia (and maybe even then), everything one says is an opinion. And anything one says may be offensive to someone. A quandary, methinks.
There seems to be a one-sided view that we must avoid being "offensive" but are not responsible for being offended.
Isn't it implicit that if one posts that he/she is inviting feedback? And isn't it obvious that the post and/or the feedback may offend someone?
Perhaps a proactive approach is needed instead of PBCs and the like: a "no feedback wanted" category of post.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 24, 2006, at 3:33:21
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » gardenergirl, posted by Jakeman on June 22, 2006, at 21:53:58
I wish it didn't feel like a hassle. I would imagine that we'd continue to benefit by more posts from you. But of course you have to do what's right for you.
Thanks,
gg
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 25, 2006, at 11:03:05
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself truthfully » gardenergirl, posted by Toph on June 22, 2006, at 14:28:31
> What I don't get is why it appears the administration is unwilling to consider a scenario in which a negative comment is supportive. In my work confronting an addictive, abusive or dangerous person with their dysfunction is a necessary part of a supportive intervention. The other day a coworker commented to me that I don't always listen to my clients as patiently as I should. I gratefully took this negative assessment as constructive and supportive as I know she wants me to do the best work I can.
The administration considers it fine to give others feedback as long as it's constructive. It tends to be more constructive if you put things in terms of what the other person might do better rather than what they did "wrong".
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
IMO, confrontation can be hard to pull off online. Like "tough love" can just seem tough.
Bob
Posted by Toph on June 25, 2006, at 12:37:12
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself constructively, posted by Dr. Bob on June 25, 2006, at 11:03:05
>
> IMO, confrontation can be hard to pull off online. Like "tough love" can just seem tough.
>
> BobTrue, calling a spade a spade, as I see it, has always led me into trouble with other posters here. I appreciate, nevertheless, that you have permitted many of us to be more confrontational with you. Toph
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 25, 2006, at 21:34:41
In reply to Re: Expressing yourself constructively, posted by Toph on June 25, 2006, at 12:37:12
> I appreciate ... that you have permitted many of us to be more confrontational with you.
You're welcome, the goal of the site isn't for *me* to receive support. :-)
Bob
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.