Thread: Tell me how to not be an asshole

Don't talk about your abilities and be more accepting of people in general.

Don't think I can help you there, bud, since I'm kind of in the same shoes.

I'd just say enjoy it. I sure do.

The fact of the matter is, people don't know the damn difference between bluntness and deliberate asshole-ness. We live in a society that needs every single word to be coated in an entire bowl of sugar. Otherwise we come off as...you said it: "Assholes".

That's a real asshole thing to say.

Do you say you're an asshole because you're argumentative and oblivious to others, or are you actively mean and hurt people?

Don't vocalize your superiority.

@ Taosaur. I think it's mainly the former but can transition into the latter if a few buttons are pushed. Most of those buttons have to do with stupidity.

My intention when starting this thread was to just be a complete Asshole to everyone that responded (for the lulz of course) but I lost heart.

The theme seems to be to accept people. How far should I go with this. For a concrete example, I'm firmly convinced that creationists are idiots until proven otherwise. Not one of them, that I know to be a creationist, has managed to do so. It might seem like I'm being stupid in asking this question, but should I change this? I mean, aren't they? Is not being an asshole, as Lezen suggested, just a matter of deluding yourself? If a culture does this en masse, isn't that sort of a problem?

Originally Posted by Kiza

That's a real asshole thing to say.

I rest my case.

I'm pretty blunt myself and in many cases I enjoy the sheer brutality of my honesty, but there are times when you say things that are just plain offensive and not helpful.

PhilosopherStoned, I too believe that creationists are idiots, but if you wish to come off as a gentle, accepting person (which will draw more people to you) it is wise never to vocalize that.

The main difference between an asshole and a blunt person is whether or not you resort to name-calling when you disagree with someone. In my eyes, it's quite assy to call a creationist stupid just because their beliefs seem silly to you. On the other hand, if you tell them "Look, I don't agree with what you believe in, live with it." then that's something else completely. That's bluntness.

So basically, when you get into an argument with someone, use your wit and vocabulary to try and debunk what the opponent's trying to say. Don't resort to undue name-calling. THAT, my friend, makes you an asshole.

EDIT: Of course, it all depends on exactly what it is that you're disagreeing with. If you're blunt in your disagreement with something that nobody agrees on completely anyway - like religion or philosophy - it's all well and good. But if you're blunt in disagreeing with something that is (or is becoming) pretty accepted and/or popular - like transsexuality, for example - prepare to have your ass crucified, because you're automatically an asshole.

I must join the club. I'm the same way, quite often. But, not so much on the interwebs, unless I feel like it.

I actually think your the sweetest and kindest guy I've ever spoken too. You just try to hard to be an asshole.

I'm often called a "sarcastic, controlling biotch"; should I aim for just "asshole"??

You are probably only an arshole to people you consider to be “family members”.

By the way, your DV family is having an invitational-only meeting tonight to discuss whether you should go “sleep with the fishes”.
__________
Greater than 99.9% of the people in the world fail to see that PhilosopherStoned is ideally suited to be the totalitarian dictator of the world in perpetuity. If you are one of the ones that do, copy and paste this into your signature.

Make it your goal to make good people feel good. That is the bottom line and the best guiding principle.

However, if somebody's a deliberate jackass and obviously trying to make somebody undeserving feel bad, fuck 'em. When using constructive criticism toward somebody good (because it really is necessary), do it in a, "I'm your buddy, for real," kind of way.

Edit: Some people are so delicate that making them feel bad is almost impossible to avoid. When that happens, it is not your fault.

I'm not your friend, buddy.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

@ Taosaur. I think it's mainly the former but can transition into the latter if a few buttons are pushed. Most of those buttons have to do with stupidity.

My intention when starting this thread was to just be a complete Asshole to everyone that responded (for the lulz of course) but I lost heart.

The theme seems to be to accept people. How far should I go with this. For a concrete example, I'm firmly convinced that creationists are idiots until proven otherwise. Not one of them, that I know to be a creationist, has managed to do so. It might seem like I'm being stupid in asking this question, but should I change this? I mean, aren't they? Is not being an asshole, as Lezen suggested, just a matter of deluding yourself? If a culture does this en masse, isn't that sort of a problem?

Well I agree with Lëzen. You can't call someone stupid just because they don't feel the same way as you. They could actually be much smarter than you.

Here is me being blunt:

I feel the same as you do but about atheists. I don't know a single atheist (and I know many, having just graduated from university) that doesn't just think they're the hottest little scientist in town. They have no manners and they tend to not have any reasoning behind their political beliefs. They are very smart individuals, it's just sad that they're so crude. I mean, my degree is in Biology, but I'm a man of science and faith. I think they can go hand-in-hand and while I believe that God exists and I admire the devotion of more 'hardcore' Christians, I think that the Bible should not be taken literally and should act as more as a guide. It's not a history book. I'll respect an atheist when I meet one who deserves any respect. Until then, forget it.

The Christians could be a little bit less jerky too, but then again, it was the atheists and radical gay supporters who ran into crowded churches in the middle of Sunday services and had clothed sex with each other in front of the congregations. Seriously. How rude and vile do they have to be? I have nothing against gays, but come on, if the people who did that think they can represent the entire gay population well then...psssh. Get real. They have no respect, and thus they deserve none.

End blunt.

If someone is going to come on here and say "Professor Gates is NOT a racist." I'm going to bad mouth you really hard because you would have to know absolutely nothing about the scenario and yet you'd be throwing your two cents in anyway (AHEM like a certain presidential someone, /AHEM). I'd be a great big jerk to you for being so numb.

Before you speak, stop and think, then say the opposite of what you were about to say.

So in that case...

Don't fuck with me go ahead and fuck with me.

Treat others like you want to be treated, very simple. Its best to spread love in all directions.

Don't apologize for the way you act. I mean, sure, try to show some control, but ultimately, would you rather be an asshole or a hypocrite?

PS: I don't see you as an asshole at all.

I lost internet for a day!

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

However, if somebody's a deliberate jackass and obviously trying to make somebody undeserving feel bad, fuck 'em. When using constructive criticism toward somebody good (because it really is necessary), do it in a, "I'm your buddy, for real," kind of way.

Good advice.

Originally Posted by Advantageous Noodle

I feel the same as you do but about atheists. I don't know a single atheist (and I know many, having just graduated from university) that doesn't just think they're the hottest little scientist in town. They have no manners and they tend to not have any reasoning behind their political beliefs. They are very smart individuals, it's just sad that they're so crude.

I guess I should give an example of what I'm talking about.

Crude as in pointing out facts?

Given:

1. A population of entities of which only a percentage can survive.
2. Occasional mutations within that population creating variation.
3. A mechanism of hereditity such that those that survive pass on their traits to offspring.

evolution is inevitable. By 1. only the most fit will survive, by 2. each generation will come with a few new traits to try out and by 3. the most successful traits will be passed on to future generations and the less poorly adapted traits will not. What is anything less than compelling about that argument?

What do political beliefs have to do with athiesm? Some are left libertarians, some are right libertarians, most are probably republicrats. You can find religious people in all of the camps that I've just mentioned. Being an athiest automatically means that you don't have reason behind it?

Originally Posted by Advantageous Noodle

The Christians could be a little bit less jerky too, but then again, it was the atheists and radical gay supporters who ran into crowded churches in the middle of Sunday services and had clothed sex with each other in front of the congregations.

So a disrespectful prank is worse than killing abortion doctors, making kids feel shamed of fundamental human desires, or supporting an attitude of fear and hatred against anyone who isn't a strict heterosexual because "god" told them to? Gays and athiests have nothing on judeo-christian-islamists as far as intolerance goes. And you are of course neglecting to point out that they did it to congregations that were attempting to deny them their right to marriage. It was immature and counter-productive but thats about the worst that you can say about it. The pastors of those congregations had no respect and hence, by your own logic, deserved none.

Thanks for not making me feel bad about my prejudice, although I was hoping that a creationist would come forward with an intelligent argument against it. Care to give it another shot?

so am I an asshole?

Originally Posted by dreamingofdreaming

I actually think your the sweetest and kindest guy I've ever spoken too. You just try to hard to be an asshole.

Originally Posted by Pixielady

Treat others like you want to be treated, very simple. Its best to spread love in all directions.

I think that this is the problem. If I say something that is wrong, I want other people to correct me and, if necessary, debate my ass into submission. So I do it as best as I can for others. I genuinely respect people when they do that for me so long as they come packing an argument. If we disagree about something objective, than only one of us can be right. I like finding out who it is so that we both can be going forward.

It seems that I'm in the minority in having that attitude.

EDIT: SG posted while I was writing.

Originally Posted by [SomeGuy]

PS: I don't see you as an asshole at all.

Thanks SG, but I think that I'm mainly talking about IRL. The times that I've been an asshole on DV, it's either been because the person that I've been being an asshole to is a 'faithless racist' or because I was sick of the person corrupting ED with a bunch of conspiricy theory BS and even then, I'm just trying to give them a good argument and knock some sense into them.

Oh. You do sound like me :p.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

So a disrespectful prank is worse than killing abortion doctors, making kids feel shamed of fundamental human desires, or supporting an attitude of fear and hatred against anyone who isn't a strict heterosexual because "god" told them to? Gays and athiests have nothing on judeo-christian-islamists as far as intolerance goes. And you are of course neglecting to point out that they did it to congregations that were attempting to deny them their right to marriage. It was immature and counter-productive but thats about the worst that you can say about it. The pastors of those congregations had no respect and hence, by your own logic, deserved none.

Prank or not, inappropriate is inappropriate. For one, it really doesn't matter which party's words or actions are more heinous, especially given the fact that the notion of wrong and right is extremely subjective. (I'm not saying it's right to bomb abortion clinics, I'm just speaking the truth.) For another, it's quite despicable to harm innocent bystanders, so to speak, because you associate them with "the enemy". Two wrongs don't make a right.

I witnessed the same bullshit in front of our college campus when our local mormons and gays were supporting/protesting Prop. 8. The 'Yes' people (mormons, mainly) were civil, never said anything that can even be considered remotely derogatory toward the other party. The 'No' people were just the opposite, belligerant and verbally abusive as all hell. Then to top it off, a couple of lesbos stand smack-dab in the middle of the street and decide to play tonsil hockey in front of the 'Yes' people's young children. And still the mormons didn't say shit.

I can clearly see, from their behavior at this particular rally, that gays aren't always as benevolent and peaceful as pro-gay groups try and make them out to be. Still doesn't mean I have the right to generalize about the gay community.

And yet you say churchies are supposed to be the shit-disturbers? Jesus titty-fucking Christ.

Wrong is wrong no matter what way you look at it, and to try and justify someone's actions by saying "Oh, well, their actions weren't as wrong as those other guys' actions!" is nothing but a cop-out. And copping out is just another aspect of assholery.

Just my two cents.

EDIT: ...two cents that will make me look like an asshole. But that's what I've been saying, right?

Originally Posted by Lëzen

... especially given the fact that the notion of wrong and right is extremely subjective.

Wrong is wrong no matter what way you look at it...

Which is it?

Originally Posted by Lëzen

The 'Yes' people (mormons, mainly) were civil, never said anything that can even be considered remotely derogatory toward the other party.

So saying that the constitution should be ammended so that people can't get married and enjoy the same rights as you isn't derogetory towards the target group? I'll assume yes and go ahead and chalk that up as another contradiction.

Originally Posted by Lëzen

Wrong is wrong no matter what way you look at it, and to try and justify someone's actions by saying "Oh, well, their actions weren't as wrong as those other guys' actions!" is nothing but a cop-out. And copping out is just another aspect of assholery.

So completely ignoring the crimes of 'the home team' isn't a cop out? I said what I think about these pranks and I stand by it. The best you can say is that you're not saying that blowing up abortion clinics is right. seriously?

Originally Posted by Lëzen

And yet you say churchies are supposed to be the shit-disturbers? Jesus titty-fucking Christ.

See above.