I agree - I hate those one up-or-downsmanship contests.
I don't think I have any experience with this. Maybe it's a Midwestern thing, but wouldn't keep any friends who behaved this way (I say Midwestern, because I know people form the East Coast who say we're all too nice naive). Part of me wonders if the author is engaging in this behavior by virtue of writing the article. Maybe it's not people; maybe it's just her.
I'm also a Midwesterner and I come across this type of behavior pretty often. It seems like this type of thinking is what leads to serious entitlement issues, the whole 'Life's not fair, I don't deserve this' attitude. It might just be my age group, though. Us college students are known for being seriously naive. I like the idea of the author engaging in the same behavior, that's pretty interesting. "You all have your stories of suffering but you only understand true suffering when you understand the deep implications of everyday conversation. Like me."
I'm an Oppression Olympics gold medalist. I've never heard of Who Suffered Most being played in the Midwest.
I'm glad you're visiting some of the older posts. As for your standing in the Oppression Olympics, how do other people react when rather than listening to their problems, you out-problem them. I imagine that, over time, they stop complaining to you -- which is probably your goal.
I'm the best--around. Nothing's gonna ever keep me down. I'm definitely opposed to oneupsmanship, either way.
the common courtesy of expressing respect is so notable it gets an article in a leading national paper.
I guess it is a sad day then. The editors must have also been irked at people's inability to listen with empathy to another person's difficulties. I find real listening, esp. to difficulties, to be rare and I cherish those few friends of mine who leave me feeling heard and understood. I hope they feel heard and understood as well. What is the listening landscape in your world neptath?
Fortunately, I have not had much tragedy in my life as of late, but I'll draw on what little recent experience I've had: it's much the same as it appears to be in yours; that is, generally lacking. Many people are unable to even maintain eye contact, let alone resist the urge to check their phone or drag another into the conversation in the hopse that they (or I) will change the subject. The few who atually are willing to listen patiently, respectfully, and sympathetically are dearly valued.What is the listening landscape in your world neptath?
I have found hubski, for the most part, to be a relatively open-hearted listening environment. The other day, I asked a question, buried in a longer response. My question could have been taken as a statement, but it was a question and b_b responded. That was cool. People can also not "listen" when reading for the same reason they do not listen in a face-to-face conversation. (Sounds like an askhubski topic). Perhaps given the text-based format, serious contributors train themselves to read carefully (if it's a topic they are interested in).
I sure hope that's the reason everyone is on a forum like this. Unless your goal is to (anonymously) show the world how smart you are, then you really can't get much out of this experience if you aren't a good "listener" (in quotes, because I actually mean reader). I like enlightening people to various things when given the opportunity, but I learn a whole lot more than I teach.Perhaps given the text-based format, serious contributors train themselves to read carefully (if it's a topic they are interested in).
How would this be achieved? Perhaps if people could click some kind of button to show their approval and acceptance of another's intelligence, and maybe if each contributer could track and see how much they had been approved of... Maybe some sort of positive image, like an upwards facing arrow or something... But I digress. There's no reason to be on a forum such as this if you don't intend to get something out of it - whether it's recent news, a new philosophical perspective, or just a quick laugh.Unless your goal is to (anonymously) show the world how smart you are
And otherwise, they just don't read at all. I couldn't have a passionate in-person discussion about the internal politics of Papua New Guinea, simply because I'm not interested in the topic, and I would probably exhibit behavior similar to that which I described above - checking my phone, calling others into the conversation, and so on. However, online, I wouldn't have to exhibit those behaviors because I wouldn't be in the discussion in the first place, I simply never would have opened up whatever page or group was discussing the internal politics of Papua New Guinea (or if I did, I probably would have immediately closed it). Thus, only those who are serious about a topic discuss it, and because they are serious and interested, they are much more likely to read and contribute.Perhaps given the text-based format, serious contributors train themselves to read carefully (if it's a topic they are interested in).