ANST - Question...

[Jan Downs]

I have found when talking to people about things like this, if you make them
wrong for whatever they did they can't hear what you are saying and it's
counterproductive.
Human beings would rather die than be wrong. Think about it: how much do
you(a general *you*, no one specific intended) hate being wrong and how much
more do you hate being told about it. This is not to say we don't all at
some point or another need some insight about how we are jerks. We all have
our flaws. As hard as it is sometimes, it is more helpful to approach this
sort of conversation from a position of compassion and the desire to make a
contribution to this person. Maybe they don't know what a jerk they're
being.

I wish I could live up to this ideal 100% of the time. ;>
Martel
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary Temple <noxcat at hotmail.com>
To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG <ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG>
Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 11:11 AM
Subject: Re: ANST - Question...


>>Good Morning,
>>
>Good Evening,
>
>>  When one person does something wrong, they are unchivalric and need
>to
>>  be taken to task for it. Right?
>>
>Perhaps. If they are self-aware and adult enough to realize they've done
>something wrong on their own, and then admit to it, and/or apologize for
>it, then no. Assuming this is not the case, then yes, although I would
>not have used the phrase "need to be taken to task". (semantics warning)
>Perhaps "spoken to"? "Shown the error of their ways"?
>
>>  People then decide that they are the judge and jury and must bring
>>  this public as rudely as possible to teach the person a lesson, and
>>  thus being unchivalric themself. Right?
>>
>Right. Miss Manners says (grin) it is even more of a breach of
>ettiquette to publicly point out someone's breach than it is to commit
>the first breach. (Hmm...does that mean parents are worse than their
>children when they tell them to take their elbows off the table?)
>
>(snippage occured here)
>>  Second, how does one properly take someone to task that is behaving
>>  inappropriately?
>>
>Well, failing the "lead by example" option, I have always thought that
>talking to them directly and PRIVATELY yields the best results. Putting
>someone on the spot is in poor taste...and can distract the person from
>thinking about the message you are trying to convey to thinking about
>how best to get out of being the one everyone's looking at.
>
>>  I have always assumed that talking plainly and calmly directly to
>>  people would work most of the time. When that doesn't work, using
>>  plain and obvious examples of why it is bad has always worked. There
>>  are of course those individuals who will do as they will no matter
>>  what. There is nothing we can do about them except socially ignore
>>  them until they go away.
>>(snippage occured here as well)
>
>Socially ignore them and HOPE they go away. For some it's not a matter
>of "do as they will no matter what". For some they just simply can't or
>won't comprehend that they're in the wrong. To do so is to admit they
>are in error, and some simply cannot do that for whatever reaon -
>"foolish pride", "insecurity", what have you.
>
>She who is never Perfect, but strives for Improvement -
>Lady Catriona Rowley
>Bryn Gwlad, Ansteorra
>>
>>--
>>Phelim "Pug" Gervase  |  "I know that I will never be politically
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>===========================================================================
=
>Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.
>

============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.